Stay Classy Paizo.

[Leress]

I would argue that it is even more annoying that the same retarded design errors get repeated over and over.

Except the designers aren't really listening. They don't even know how to do a proper playtest. That's fundamental shit right there.

[Koumei]

I'm surprised you even bother posting there any more, K. I mean, they had made it clear the first time round that they didn't want to do anything useful or make a good, fun, balanced game.

[malak]

Can anyone explain to me why pointing out that Fighters blow is resisted so fiercely that even designers take time out of their day to come in to smack you with their dicks?

You should have picked another nickname. The paizo designers are probably aware of the den and the tomes and just envy your gift of 'understanding 3.5 mechanics'.

So what if the thread is locked - there's lots of others, and trolling engaging people in a lively discussion at paizo is more fun than on many other boards because of the groupthink and the blind fandom many posters express.

Edit: updated. Thanks Crissa.

[Crissa]

Posting about specific trolling is forbidden on these forums.

-Crissa

[Lago PARANOIA]

Do you spend your day standing in front of a baby haranguing it on why it shouldn't shit in it's pants? Wouldn't that be about the most tedious thing ever?

Your analogy kind of falls apart there with the use of the word 'baby'. Babies can't help themselves. Also the implication that I would do this all day.

A better question to ask would be 'if a smelly co-worker showed up to work stinking to high heaven due to poor hygiene every day despite the office telling him that he/she stunk, would you keep telling them to go home and take a shower after refusal no. 50? Wouldn't that be about the most tedious thing ever?'

The answer to that would be 'yes, it would be tedious, but even if it doesn't work for the next thirty years you may as well keep bringing it up'.

[Juton]

Remember when ToB came out and everyone was saying that Warblades where than Druids/Clerics/Wizards? To the people here that sounds retarded, but to a substantial part of the 3.5 community this was and is probably true. Most optimizers are playing a fundamentally different game than most D&D players I've played with.

The main designer has had multiple chances to fix fighters and to fix monks. The ways in which you can improve upon a Monk are so numerous and obvious that to me that it indicates he doesn't want to improve them. If you think about it, Paizo's fan base wants Wizards to be shooting fireballs not molesting reality, and they want to do it the same way they've been doing for 10 years now. They've had ample opportunities to hope system but they don't want to.

So your primary demographic plays with low optimization and is highly resistant to change, are you going to do something to the Fighter as drastic as Races of War? No, you are going to keep pumping out inoffensive splats that has a lot of new material but doesn't really change the game.

[Fuchs]

Weird thought: What would be the reaction if the self-imposed and likely unknown "caps" for wizards and clerics etc. which so many seem to use were codified?

[Zinegata]

Do you spend your day standing in front of a baby haranguing it on why it shouldn't shit in it's pants? Wouldn't that be about the most tedious thing ever?

Your analogy kind of falls apart there with the use of the word 'baby'. Babies can't help themselves. Also the implication that I would do this all day.

A better question to ask would be 'if a smelly co-worker showed up to work stinking to high heaven due to poor hygiene every day despite the office telling him that he/she stunk, would you keep telling them to go home and take a shower after refusal no. 50? Wouldn't that be about the most tedious thing ever?'

The answer to that would be 'yes, it would be tedious, but even if it doesn't work for the next thirty years you may as well keep bringing it up'.

And your analogy falls apart because other gamers aren't your coworkers. You're not responsible for what they do. In fact, the moment you try to be "responsible" for them you're just seen as intruding into their fun.

Again, I'm not seeing the point of any of this Paizo forum invading. We know their Monk is shit. Everyone except die hard Paizo fans think it's shit. They're not gonna change it anyway. Them playing shit doesn't change the way we play or design games.

So why waste time whining about them instead of say, making up cool shit instead?

PoliteNewb's original point was pretty much correct. Stop encouraging trolling in other forums. It just creates useless piles of negativity that confirms the widely held view that the Den is just a dumping ground for misfits.

[Prak]

Weird thought: What would be the reaction if the self-imposed and likely unknown "caps" for wizards and clerics etc. which so many seem to use were codified?

what caps? the damage caps for spell level?

[PoliteNewb]

Do you spend your day standing in front of a baby haranguing it on why it shouldn't shit in it's pants? Wouldn't that be about the most tedious thing ever?

Your analogy kind of falls apart there with the use of the word 'baby'. Babies can't help themselves. Also the implication that I would do this all day.

Hey man, you brought up babies. I was extending your analogy.

A better question to ask would be 'if a smelly co-worker showed up to work stinking to high heaven due to poor hygiene every day despite the office telling him that he/she stunk, would you keep telling them to go home and take a shower after refusal no. 50? Wouldn't that be about the most tedious thing ever?'

Yeah, it would be tedious as fuck, and I wouldn't do it. I'd complain to the supervisor, I'd stay away from him, I'd find another job if it bugged me enough. But no, I really wouldn't see the point of telling him every single morning, "dude, you fucking stink, go wash", especially after he'd already made clear he was going to ignore me.

Oh, and your analogy fails as well, because a smelly dude in your office is something that directly impacts you. How does the fact that some people like to play shitty fighters impact you at all?

The answer to that would be 'yes, it would be tedious, but even if it doesn't work for the next thirty years you may as well keep bringing it up'.

Why? In case one day he wakes up and says, "you know what, Lago's been right all these years and I've been wrong. I will atone for my ways and go bathe"? Fuck no, he's not going to do that, and pretending it's doing anything other than making you feel good for making an effort is deluding yourself.

Just like I'm deluding myself by pretending I have any chance of persuading you by sweet reason here. I am doing what I have already said people should avoid: trying to convince people to change behaviors they've made it clear they have no intention of changing. So that said, I'll take my own advice and shut the fuck up.

Good day, sir.

[Wyzzard]

Weird thought: What would be the reaction if the self-imposed and likely unknown "caps" for wizards and clerics etc. which so many seem to use were codified?

It would be the end of efficiency, heralding in a new dark age of failure and retardation.

Wizards would blast, would become Warmages, would Blow Goats For Pocket Change.
Clerics would heal in combat, would become Healers, would Blow Warmages For Pizza Crust.

By all thats still Unholy, do not summon the End Times!

[Fuchs]

Weird thought: What would be the reaction if the self-imposed and likely unknown "caps" for wizards and clerics etc. which so many seem to use were codified?

what caps? the damage caps for spell level?

The "don't break the game, don't make the fighter look bad in comparison, use more fireballs than actually powerful spells" limits so many seem to use consciously or unconsciously.

[Juton]

Weird thought: What would be the reaction if the self-imposed and likely unknown "caps" for wizards and clerics etc. which so many seem to use were codified?

4e?

In 3.5 you'd have a huge list of nerfed/banned spells, the players who don't use those spells would be fine with it, but those who like teleport would not.

[Fuchs]

I don't mean a new edition, I mean, what would happen if the people who play the game in a way that makes them feel fighters are fine would actually write down all the "unspoken" limits they use. Would they suddenly consider the "unlimited", aka RAW wizard for example as overpowered?

[Kaiyanwang]

Sorry for jumping this way mid-thread.. I'm a Paizo "fanboy" (no, not true).

I want to ask to K if is true the thread is "Wizard Winning Tactics". If true, I could be slightly pissed off with Paizo.

Because even if not visible on the thread, you can find K's answers looking for K post from his profile. (The longer one is answering to a post of mine" and there is nothing enough to have the message deleted).

Here is it the answer.

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

K I ask: Were you referring to that thread?

[Crissa]

Actually, that some people play a shitty version of the game you play does affect you. Because this is a social game. Which requires more than one person.

When I (or K) goes off looking for a game, he will get responses which include 'want to play a shitty game?' and 'how about Pathfinder?' Which are basically the same thing. Doesn't that get tedious?

No amount of avoidance will be result in a dearth of those replies without abandoning the game he wants to play.

-Crissa

[Juton]

I don't mean a new edition, I mean, what would happen if the people who play the game in a way that makes them feel fighters are fine would actually write down all the "unspoken" limits they use. Would they suddenly consider the "unlimited", aka RAW wizard for example as overpowered?

I'd imagine that most of those people choose spells like Fireball over spells like Solid Fog, because Solid Fog doesn't do any damage and makes it harder to shoot your enemy. So those people don't have any special rules to make themselves behave.

There is also a significant part of gamers who casually read boards like 339 or Min/Max It! and can understand it but don't really internalize it. So they might drop a Solid Fog but not use it properly or not know how to follow it up. They don't have any special rules either.

There are people who play Wizards more 'subtly' I guess, who see the beatsticks in their party as extensions of themselves, so are very liberal with things like Heroism, Haste and using Battlefield Control. Basically what Treantmonk is on about when he says 'being a GOD'. There only special rule is teamwork, I think they are on the right track because sharing buffs with the party allows you to clear a lot more of a dungeon than soloing encounters.

I don't know too much about the people who hold back, because generally if they aren't 1 of the 3 types I've mentioned then I've only ever seen them break the game.

[K]

Sorry for jumping this way mid-thread.. I'm a Paizo "fanboy" (no, not true).

I want to ask to K if is true the thread is "Wizard Winning Tactics". If true, I could be slightly pissed off with Paizo.

Because even if not visible on the thread, you can find K's answers looking for K post from his profile. (The longer one is answering to a post of mine" and there is nothing enough to have the message deleted).

Yeh, that's my post that got deleted. Nice to know that Paizo is as bad at censorship as they are at other things. It was up for several hours before vanishing, so it seems unlikely it's a forum error.

[Kaiyanwang]

Thank you K.

I don't agree, at least at the same level, with many people here, but what has been done is unfair.

On this route, I doubt things will end well (see people complaining about editing and stuff).


To finally answer to you: IMO, many problems could have been fixed without feared great changes just changing casting times and stuff. One could discuss or not retrocompatibility, but change from 1 action to 3, 5 or 10 round the casting time of spells intended as utility could have been something.

See you around. Sorry for the partial derail, but I finish what I start.

[DragonChild]

I'm curious, is the person who's blatantly insulting you, taking your arguments about how the rules work and responding with "But you're stupid and your DM sucks!" getting his posts deleted?

Or does Paizo think insulting someone's friends with no proof is good, while pointing out how their rules *actually work* is bad?

[K]

There are people who play Wizards more 'subtly' I guess, who see the beatsticks in their party as extensions of themselves, so are very liberal with things like Heroism, Haste and using Battlefield Control. Basically what Treantmonk is on about when he says 'being a GOD'. There only special rule is teamwork, I think they are on the right track because sharing buffs with the party allows you to clear a lot more of a dungeon than soloing encounters.

Sharing buffs rarely causes you to win encounters in DnD. I mean, for the slots wasted on Heroism and Haste I could use Web and Stinking Cloud to completely remove all actions from a group of monsters for the rest of the encounter. That's a win.

Buffing only makes sense in MMOs, where some monsters can't even be meaningfully damaged until the appropriate buff is used, but in DnD an extra +2 to hit and damage is next to meaningless.

[K]

I'm curious, is the person who's blatantly insulting you, taking your arguments about how the rules work and responding with "But you're stupid and your DM sucks!" getting his posts deleted?

Or does Paizo think insulting someone's friends with no proof is good, while pointing out how their rules *actually work* is bad?

Paizo seems to have a very clear policy of "it's ok to cyberstalk and insult people who criticize our system, and then we'll harass them too." During the Open Playest, I had like four people following me into every thread I posted to harass me, regardless of the topic.

I don't even understand why I am considered worthy of harassment.

[souran]

I don't mean a new edition, I mean, what would happen if the people who play the game in a way that makes them feel fighters are fine would actually write down all the "unspoken" limits they use. Would they suddenly consider the "unlimited", aka RAW wizard for example as overpowered?

Its not just "hidden limits to wizards" its everything and every aspect of the game. The den seems to me to play a totally different kind of D&D than the typical player. Not only that, but the den solution when it turns out that more than half the classes, feats, powers etc are not just bad but actually TRAPS that lower your overall potential.

The even bigger issue is: The dens solution is to buff everybody up to where they are at least interesting at the level/intensity of play discussed and not actually a hindrance to druids/wizards/clerics.

Why is this an issue?: Look at the thread that Frank linked to earlier: If you explain that the upper end of the game is one in which the "optimal" way to play a druid is to do things like
Turn into a flaming elemental cat -> use another spell to turn into a kind of treant because it lets you retain the burning cats extraordinary powers -> aquire a monk feat that lets you do fling kicks when you charge -> ATTACK YOUR FOES AS A GIGANTIC, FIRE-CAT-TREANT THAT DOES KUNG FU FLYING KICKS there heads will explode.

The sad part is that that druid is still fighitng phsyically and so therefore is really NOT pulling off the "this fight is over before it begins" crap that most casters are doing by high level.

A lot of people actually want there games to be like 4e where being in the paragon tier or the epic teir actually changes fairly little about how the game plays. You still do the same things you did 29 levels ago, the thief still picks pockets, only now instead of picking the pocket of the evil noble who was the villian at levels 1-5 he picks asmodeus' pocket. The fact that fighting asmodeus in hell itself is only mostly cosmetically differenent than facing the evil noble actually increases their stasifcation with the game.

What are the limits these players artifically put on casters? Here are a few:

1) Monsters are defeated by reducing their hp to 0. This encourages wizards to blast blast and blast away. A lot of DMs discourage their wizards from taking save or dies that don't get dispelled on damage or that last long periods of time or whatever.

Frank would be up in arms but a lot of players don't care. Seriously, the fact that SOD spells "always seem to fail" when used on plot characters or main villians is considered just a part of the game. Sort of like how only a couple of bosses in final fantsy can be killed with Zap! or similar spells.

2) Any spell that would take the DM longer than about 3 minutes to adjudicate or explain is banned because of the dark stares you get from other players for using them.

A lot of wizards end up picking spells because they are straightforward and do 1 thing and get that thing accomplsihed. The spells that are abusive are almost univerally spells that are written such that you can do lots of different but similar things with it.

A lot of wizards take haste because its clear what it does, even if it is a buff that just isn't that good. Also a lot of players take bad spells from 4th+ level because very few have really really looked at what the spells do from then on. They pick simple spells because they don't want to leaf through the book and read every spell. They pick spells by names.

3) Plot wreckers get the ban hammer: As soon as a spell has single handedly foiled a GM plot or messed up a "cool" part of the adventure many game masters will come down on that spell like a ton of bricks. Solid Fog, Stoneshape, etc. Once you have pissed your game master off by using one of these you better not even bother memorizing it again because it won't work.

4) Vancian casting is not for all types: There are many people who cannot play a vancian caster well. They either blow their whole spell list in a single encounter or they horde each spell and dole out the weakest ones first.


So yeah, people don't like the den because nothing here matches there experience becasue they do not play the game this way. However, they DO encounter the side effects of the games core working problems and then they don't really understand why things do not go the way they should.

[Maxus]

To finally answer to you: IMO, many problems could have been fixed without feared great changes just changing casting times and stuff. One could discuss or not retrocompatibility, but change from 1 action to 3, 5 or 10 round the casting time of spells intended as utility could have been something.
.

That means no one ever gets a spell off. "He's casting! STAB HIM!"

[Fuchs]

To finally answer to you: IMO, many problems could have been fixed without feared great changes just changing casting times and stuff. One could discuss or not retrocompatibility, but change from 1 action to 3, 5 or 10 round the casting time of spells intended as utility could have been something.
.

That means no one ever gets a spell off. "He's casting! STAB HIM!"

I remember 2E leading to high-level spells only being cast when there was no way a caster could be attacked - otherwise, the higher the spell was, the bigger the chance was that one would get hit during casting and lose it.