Pathfinder Is Still Bad

[Antariuk]

Okay, fine.

1.) The first is that Pathfinder decided to go for incremental and highly visible but unimportant changes to 3.5E D&D rather than going all-out.

2.) Because of this, the game's power level has slowly floated up thanks to expansion creep and in a lot of ways the game is more unbalanced than 3.5E D&D. The cleric archer is by no means dead, it just has a different form. The blaster wizard lost a couple of tricks and gained quite a few more.

3.) Pathfinder's fanbase and developers have collective amnesia towards the whole backwards compatibility promise and they have welshed on the number-one promise that led them to becoming a market leader in the first place.

I'd like to expand on that:

1.1) Some changes however are pretty well hidden, so if you're coming from a 3.5 game, glossing over feats and spells, thinking "Well, that looks kinda familiar, can't be that bad?" chances are you glossed over something that works different now. Popular example: Cleave cannot be used with a charge attack anymore. The FAQs from Paizo are notorious in that regard, especially since you really have to dig deep to find everything.

2.2) The amount of option available right now is quite staggering, since about everything Paizo releases contains new materials you may or may not want to consider at character creation. Depending on how serious you take system mastery, you have a real problem when the GM says "Everying Paizo is in". In terms of power level, the ceiling isn't as high as in 3.5 anymore, but the room has gotten really, really wide. With echoes and everything.

[ishy]

Well if you want to talk about hidden changes, 3.5 had this rule

Note: Small and Medium creatures wielding reach weapons threaten all squares 10 feet (2 squares) away, even diagonally. (This is an exception to the rule that 2 squares of diagonal distance is measured as 15 feet.)

Pathfinder does not have it. Thus small and medium creatures with reach weapons can't attack diagonally.

---

You can ride creatures of your size category, although encumbrance or other factors might limit how you can use this ability.

Normal: Typically a mount suited for you is at least one size category larger than you.

Does this count as a feat that does nothing or is it stealth errata?

According to the pathfinder forum, the feat just references unwritten (but still have always been in effect) rules.

[icyshadowlord]

How do I explain to my players that the Pathfinder version of Power Attack is worse than the 3.5e one? Most seem to think the PF one is better for some reason.

[Ice9]

By itself, it is better. When you run the math for 3.5 PA by itself, you're not going to want to PA for more than few points most of the time, and the PF version gives you a better ratio.

Where the 3.5 version becomes better is that:
1) There were a variety of feats/classes that boosted the ratio, eventually giving you up to 1:5 or so.
2) There was a feat that made the attack penalty an AC penalty instead. And also a fair number of ways to make your attack be a touch attack. Which allowed you to take a huge penalty and still hit.

[ishy]

3.5 and PF power attack are used differently.

PF power attack is basically always on, a minor accuracy penalty for a dmg bonus.

3.5 power attack is used to play with the RNG. It allows you to bleed off excess hit and punish people for running around with low AC.

[Roog]

How do I explain to my players that the Pathfinder version of Power Attack is worse than the 3.5e one? Most seem to think the PF one is better for some reason.

The bonus damage does not apply to touch attacks

[Voss]

I also understand the rationale behind that, but there are a lot of reasons (spells, items and more) that you wouldn't be just 'touching' people with a 'touch attack', but instead swinging as hard as possible.

'Balance' meets 'realism' meets 'can't have nice things' = train wreck.

[ishy]

So the fly skill has this text:

You cannot take ranks in this skill without a natural means of flight or gliding. Creatures can also take ranks in Fly if they possess a reliable means of flying every day (either through a spell or other special ability).

So when do you think a sorcerer can put ranks in the fly skill:

A) if you know the levitate spell
B) if you know the fly spell
C) if you know the overland flight spell
D) once you get Wings of Heaven (the celestial bloodline ability)

Answer:

The answer is: Fuck you, none of the above.

SKR[/url]]I just talked to Jason about this, and under the strictest interpretation of the current rules, unless you have a "reliable means of flying every day," you don't meet the prerequisite of "Fly speed" (which is what Flyby Attack and Hover have).

Jason is falling on the side of "unless you have it all the time, it's not 'reliable,' so it doesn't count." To which I reply, "that means if I'm a sor/wiz who learns and casts overland flight every day (1 hour/level), at level 16+ I'm able to fly every minute of the day that I'm normally awake, yet I still don't qualify for the feat." To which he replies, "yep, but otherwise a 5th-level wizard who knows fly can take Flyby Attack, which is really a 'shortcut feat' [in that its effect is much like Spring Attack without having to take all the prereqs] and is probably too good."

So, as written, if your flight is always on (like several 15th-level sorcerer bloodlines) you qualify for those feats. If your flight is periodic (like the fly spell, alchemist wing discovery, or 9th-level celestial sorcerer wings of heaven bloodline ability), you don't qualify.

Which, IMO, is needlessly complex...

[Voss]

So the skill is even more worthless mindfuckery. I guess since I'm not surgically attached to my car, I don't have a reliable way of getting to work. Weird, since I get there every day.

[Longes]

SKR... being the reasonable person... OH NO, THE WORLD IS FALLING APART! RUN, EVERYONE! THE SKY IS BURNING, THE RIVERS RUN RED WITH BLOOD! ARAHRAGGARGGAHRGA

[Count Arioch the 28th]

I have ran Pathfinder for a few months using the "everything is in" rule, and this is the first game where I've ever regretted that. I rant 3.5 with "no thought bottle, no nightstick, full replacement polymorph" house rules, and I had nowhere near the problems I had with pathfinder. I ran 2e with "everything from every setting in, go fucking nuts" and that wasn't as bad.

And most of it wasn't overpowered in the least, it was crap like "my 14th level barbarian deals 1d6 damage to anything that hits him in melee that doesn't overcome DR, and I'm going to remind you every hit even though the bad guys have DR 10/whatever and even if they didn't 14th level things are dealing 50+ damage per hit and 1d6 is nothing".

[Laertes]

And most of it wasn't overpowered in the least, it was crap like "my 14th level barbarian deals 1d6 damage to anything that hits him in melee that doesn't overcome DR, and I'm going to remind you every hit even though the bad guys have DR 10/whatever and even if they didn't 14th level things are dealing 50+ damage per hit and 1d6 is nothing".

That just sounds like a shitty player.

[Neurosis]

This seems like " a lot of little things" maybe...does Pathfinder actually improve on 3.5 anywhere? Where are the most noteworthy, major places where it fails to?

Where the 3.5 version becomes better is that:
1) There were a variety of feats/classes that boosted the ratio, eventually giving you up to 1:5 or so.
2) There was a feat that made the attack penalty an AC penalty instead. And also a fair number of ways to make your attack be a touch attack. Which allowed you to take a huge penalty and still hit.

Share this cheese! I have not tasted of it!

[Kaelik]

This seems like " a lot of little things" maybe...does Pathfinder actually improve on 3.5 anywhere? Where are the most noteworthy, major places where it fails to?

Where the 3.5 version becomes better is that:
1) There were a variety of feats/classes that boosted the ratio, eventually giving you up to 1:5 or so.
2) There was a feat that made the attack penalty an AC penalty instead. And also a fair number of ways to make your attack be a touch attack. Which allowed you to take a huge penalty and still hit.

Share this cheese! I have not tasted of it!

Seriously? The ubercharger is like, the most simple and common 3.5 power build that has ever existed.

[Dean]

It has two major variations. There's the traditional ubercharger and then the Cavalry Ubercharger. It's actually hard to build an Ubercharger wrong given how many options you have. For this demonstrations of a basic Ubercharger lets use a Lion totem Barbarian into a Frenzied Barbarian. Lets make the character 11th level because 20th level builds don't impress me. You take Power Attack, Leap Attack and Shock Trooper and the flip out and charge people.

You'll be insanely strong because you have two different rages on at once for +10 strength. Your power attack damage bonus will be at 400% thanks to 2 handing, Leap attack, and the Greater Power attack class feature. You will also definitely hit because Shock Trooper applies the power attack negatives to you AC instead of your to-hit score. You will also get a full compliment of attacks because you have pounce. That means at BASE your charge would look like this:

4 Greatsword Attacks, +28 (2d6+62). That's an average of 276 damage. Enough to one-shot anything in your CR band and at a high enough attack bonus that you only miss on one's. It's a very reliable build.

[erik]

a Lion totem Barbarian into a Frenzied Barbarian. Lets make the character 11th level because 20th level builds don't impress me. You take Power Attack, Leap Attack and Shock Trooper and the flip out and charge people.

To flesh it out a bit more. You'll need a couple fighter levels in that naturally:

Feats required: (7)
Power Attack
Cleave
Destructive Rage
Intimidating Rage
Leap Attack
Improved Bull Rush
Shock Trooper

Feats from levels: 4
Feats from human: 1
Feats needed from fighter: 2

So you're looking at:
4 Barbarian (spirit lion totem- Complete Champ)/2 Fighter/5 Frenzied Berzerker (Complete Warrior)

Tho, I never liked Frenzied Berzerker since it feels like begging to be a team-killer.

[Kaelik]

Yeah, fuck Frenzied. Just Barbarian/Fighter into nothing or something weird is preferable.

But the point is that you 2/1 Power attack. Then you Use Leap Attack to double that to 4/1. Then you can either dumpsterdrive for another doubling of power attack or charge damage, with charge damage easier to effectively get 8/1 ratio on your power attack.

Then you power attack for full using Shocktrooper, which requires you to charge, but lets you take a penalty to your own AC instead of to attack with Power Attack. So at level 10, you power attack for 80 damage on each attack before anything else like Strength/magic/ect.

[erik]

But the point is that you 2/1 Power attack. Then you Use Leap Attack to double that to 4/1. Then you can either dumpsterdrive for another doubling of power attack or charge damage, with charge damage easier to effectively get 8/1 ratio on your power attack.

Leap attack only doubles up to 3/1 right? Doubled doublings being additive rather than multiplicative.

[Koumei]

Yeah, that is sadly the case. People got 4:1 by adding Frenzied Berserker, which has its own problems.

Although you can increase this ratio (and the multiplier of your Strength bonus) by gaining extra arms through the method of your choice (Grafts, Spells, Warshaper Prestige Class).

[Seerow]

Yeah, that is sadly the case. People got 4:1 by adding Frenzied Berserker, which has its own problems.

Although you can increase this ratio (and the multiplier of your Strength bonus) by gaining extra arms through the method of your choice (Grafts, Spells, Warshaper Prestige Class).

Also straight up charge multipliers get added at the end, which is why mounted uberchargers are so effective. Spirited Charge would take you from 3 to 1 power attack ratio up to 9 to 1 because the x3 multiplier applies to all damage and not just PA damage. I think Battle Jump and Headlong Rush work similarly, which made them popular.

[Kaelik]

But the point is that you 2/1 Power attack. Then you Use Leap Attack to double that to 4/1. Then you can either dumpsterdrive for another doubling of power attack or charge damage, with charge damage easier to effectively get 8/1 ratio on your power attack.

Leap attack only doubles up to 3/1 right? Doubled doublings being additive rather than multiplicative.

Leap attack is not a doubling. It changes the ratio to a specific thing. AFAICR. Been a long damn time since I have thought seriously about uberchargers.

[ishy]

Leap attack errata :

If you cover at least 10 feet of horizontal distance with
your jump, and you end your jump in a square from
which you threaten your target, you deal +100% the
normal bonus damage from your use of the Power
Attack feat.

[FatR]

This seems like " a lot of little things" maybe...does Pathfinder actually improve on 3.5 anywhere? Where are the most noteworthy, major places where it fails to?

(1)Worsening the explosion of fiddly mechanical shit that made generating mid- to high-level 3.5 characters a chore. All classes have a lot of tiny fiddly abilities, and likely a good number of subclasses and class variants, and then there are tons of races, and racial variants, and an absurd number of feats, etc. You have to fine-comb all of that looking for synergies, or squeezing out a few extra percents of effectiveness here and there. Doing that is painful, not doing that leaves people unfulfilled. Most of these mechanical options do not even allow you to do cool things, they just add numbers.

I personally do not like to run 3.5 at two-digit levels not because the game breaks (that I found relatively easy to avert), but because it slows down far too much and I don't appreciate spending 2 hours every session twiddling my thumbs, while the players make elaborate plans, analyze their options for the next level up (even though I give XP at a session's end, so players level up between them, such talk is unavoidable), shop for equipment and craft. Pathfinder promises to be actively worse in this area.

(2)Lifting the list of classes from PHB wholesale, even though it was really not that hard to make the existing 3.5 material passably balanced by editing the allowed class list.

(3)Not doing anything to the skill system. Certainly not anything that could improve it.

[hogarth]

This seems like " a lot of little things" maybe...does Pathfinder actually improve on 3.5 anywhere? Where are the most noteworthy, major places where it fails to?

The difference between 3.5 and Pathfinder is minimal, despite what people may claim here.

[erik]

This seems like " a lot of little things" maybe...does Pathfinder actually improve on 3.5 anywhere? Where are the most noteworthy, major places where it fails to?

The difference between 3.5 and Pathfinder is minimal, despite what people may claim here.

What I have seen people claim is that 3e is as to 3.5 as 3.5 is to Pathfinder. Very similar general rulesets that have been changed on minor specifics just enough that characters are no longer portable between editions and with no appreciable improvement overall.