The Gaming Den

Prak wrote: Look, just because Trump's a millionaire doesn't mean he's not a fucking idiot. Same concept. It's like idealogues are somehow business savants.

Well, that and a huge part of Pathfinder's success comes from WotC's crew holding serve and promptly delivering a double fault.

Covent wrote:Wow...

Do you have links for those?

I would love to show the originals to a friend of mine and grin.

First one can be found here, and is way more likely to be relevant. The 2014 comment is found here, and the 2016 one is found here

The clerics of one of the setting's goddesses are whip wielding domintrices.

Erastil isnt the sexist fan service you are looking for.

[/img]

Whipstitch wrote:

Prak wrote: Look, just because Trump's a millionaire doesn't mean he's not a fucking idiot. Same concept. It's like idealogues are somehow business savants.

Well, that and a huge part of Pathfinder's success comes from WotC's crew holding serve and promptly delivering a double fault.

That just supports my point. If anyone's retarded here, it was the old WotC crew.

And also the new WotC crew I guess, since while Paizo's forums have plenty of activity, WotC decided "fuck forums" and burned their own to the ground.

Really, if you call anyone at Paizo retarded, what do you call the dudes at WotC who decided the community shouldn't be allowed any kind of voice?

maglag wrote:

Whipstitch wrote:

Prak wrote: Look, just because Trump's a millionaire doesn't mean he's not a fucking idiot. Same concept. It's like idealogues are somehow business savants.

Well, that and a huge part of Pathfinder's success comes from WotC's crew holding serve and promptly delivering a double fault.

That just supports my point. If anyone's retarded here, it was the old WotC crew.

And also the new WotC crew I guess, since while Paizo's forums have plenty of activity, WotC decided "fuck forums" and burned their own to the ground.

Really, if you call anyone at Paizo retarded, what do you call the dudes at WotC who decided the community shouldn't be allowed any kind of voice?

So what you are saying is that Trump is a Grade A genius because Bush exists?

Keep going maglag, if you try hard enough, I'm sure you can eventually use every single fallacy to defend Piazo.

I know Paizo's made 'clarifications' of scry no longer providing sufficient information for teleportation magic, and technically JJ's sexist Erastil is essentially a clarification in favor of just plain changing his mind. Are there other changes Paizo's made they've tried to spin as "you just read the rules wrong" rather than actually admit them as rule changes/errata?

maglag wrote:
Really, if you call anyone at Paizo retarded, what do you call the dudes at WotC who decided the community shouldn't be allowed any kind of voice?

I dunno, double retarded? If I have spent more time shitting on Pathfinder than 4e & 5e it's only because those two games would be beneath my notice if stripped of the D&D IP.

virgil wrote:I know Paizo's made 'clarifications' of scry no longer providing sufficient information for teleportation magic, and technically JJ's sexist Erastil is essentially a clarification in favor of just plain changing his mind. Are there other changes Paizo's made they've tried to spin as "you just read the rules wrong" rather than actually admit them as rule changes/errata?

The first one that comes to mind is when they said that Pathfinder monks have never been able to make all of their flurry attacks with a single weapon, despite having written multiple adventures where monk NPCs are listed as making all their flurry attacks with a single weapon.

"Floating runes" - Paizo decided there was some way to detect silent stilled spells so you'd need cunning caster or similar to cast stealthily. It was, apparently, always this way until they released that feat. Note that this breaks a bunch of stealthy magical monsters.

Similarly for the silent kill type abilities. Without them the perception DC to detect a rogue knifing a guard is DC -10 (combat), the stealth skill is irrelevant. Always true according to Paizo.

Orca wrote:"Floating runes" - Paizo decided there was some way to detect silent stilled spells so you'd need cunning caster or similar to cast stealthily. It was, apparently, always this way until they released that feat. Note that this breaks a bunch of stealthy magical monsters.

Similarly for the silent kill type abilities. Without them the perception DC to detect a rogue knifing a guard is DC -10 (combat), the stealth skill is irrelevant. Always true according to Paizo.

Those may be silly rulings, but at least those weren't actually reversing a previous policy while claiming to be the original policy all along.

Courageous weapon

hogarth wrote:

Orca wrote:"Floating runes" - Paizo decided there was some way to detect silent stilled spells so you'd need cunning caster or similar to cast stealthily. It was, apparently, always this way until they released that feat. Note that this breaks a bunch of stealthy magical monsters.

Similarly for the silent kill type abilities. Without them the perception DC to detect a rogue knifing a guard is DC -10 (combat), the stealth skill is irrelevant. Always true according to Paizo.

Those may be silly rulings, but at least those weren't actually reversing a previous policy while claiming to be the original policy all along.

The existence of paizo-created stealthy monsters with magical abilities which stop being stealthy with this ruling (e.g. many fey which by their descriptions use their spell-like abilities without being instantly discovered) is an argument to the contrary.

Orca wrote:The existence of paizo-created stealthy monsters with magical abilities which stop being stealthy with this ruling (e.g. many fey which by their descriptions use their spell-like abilities without being instantly discovered) is an argument to the contrary.

I haven't read the ruling you're referring to. Are you saying that people are claiming that using a spell-like ability makes noise now? That's a far cry from saying "even when you're casting a silent, stilled spell, people can see you concentrating on something", which is what I thought you were talking about.

hogarth wrote:I haven't read the ruling you're referring to. Are you saying that people are claiming that using a spell-like ability makes noise now? That's a far cry from saying "even when you're casting a silent, stilled spell, people can see you concentrating on something", which is what I thought you were talking about.

AFAIK, this came up with Ultimate Intrigue since that book has yet another feat or two to obfuscate the casting of spells, and it's been indicated by Paizo that indeed all spells or spell-like abilities come along with some magic-y manifestations like floating runes or glowing lights as seen on so many Paizo covers (even when using Silent Spell and Still Spell). It's a bit like they suddenly decided that from now on magic has auditory/visual displays like psionic powers do, only that it's not mentioned anywhere in the rules except the shitty options available to conceal these mysterious manifestations that nobody knew about.

virgil wrote:First one can be found here

This whole thread is so sexist, it makes me puke. Is it normal doctor ?


Anyone on his right mind would read that thread and think "OK, so that's the comments I'm encouraging by creating a LG sexist deity in my game world ? Huh, so no LG sexist deity in my world". For once, I can only support JJ in his change of mind.

GâtFromKI wrote:Anyone on his right mind would read that thread and think "OK, so that's the comments I'm encouraging by creating a LG sexist deity in my game world ? Huh, so no LG sexist deity in my world". For once, I can only support JJ in his change of mind.

I'm personally fine with the decision itself, but I'm frustrated at the behavior of acting as if it was something that slipped past his notice and had never been acceptable in his eyes, which is decidedly not what happened.

I'm starting to think that Paizo's "we've always been at war with Eastasia" attitude is a deliberate move. At least some of their fans are people who disliked 4E specifically because it implied 3E was flawed (as opposed to disliking it because it's not good).

So maybe what they're trying to sell is:
"Hey DMs ... the system has always been fine, it was those darn munchkin players that were messing things up. And we fixed that - you can tell, because we nerfed specific things that people complained about.
And so now the system is perfect. And we're perfect. You don't need to ... ugh ... have a mechanics discussion with your players, or evaluate whether things are balanced. Just use what's in the book, and remember that if something seems broken, it's really the player's fault for misunderstanding how it works. We might change the wording to make that more clear, but it was always correct in spirit."

Or they're just kind of petty and don't like admitting they ever made a mistake. Occam's Razor and all that.

Ice9 wrote: We might change the wording to make that more clear, but it was always correct in spirit."

That reminds me of the recent thread that got locked where someone complained that HeroLab getting FAQ-like clarifications in advance while normal people where arguing back and forth on the Paizo messageboards without anyone of the developers making a helpful comment to ease the matter is not cool. Apparently it is cool, probably because HeroLab means money and also fvck you for wanting non-stupid errata or clarifications.

Didn't 3.5 give penalties to spellcraft to identify still and silent spells? I did a quick search and it looks like Pathfinder no longer does that. I'm not saying that the glowing runes ruling isn't out of nowhere, but I feel that someone trained in spellcraft should be able to tell if someone's casting a still silent spell (and am okay with people not trained thinking the caster just has a fart caught halfway, and not knowing at all if the caster is hiding or not visible)

Count Arioch the 28th wrote:Didn't 3.5 give penalties to spellcraft to identify still and silent spells? I did a quick search and it looks like Pathfinder no longer does that. I'm not saying that the glowing runes ruling isn't out of nowhere, but I feel that someone trained in spellcraft should be able to tell if someone's casting a still silent spell (and am okay with people not trained thinking the caster just has a fart caught halfway, and not knowing at all if the caster is hiding or not visible)

"Identify a spell being cast. (You must see or hear the spell’s verbal or somatic components.) No action required. No retry."

There is a -2 penalty for a missing component, but if you can't see or hear then you can't do it at all.

I have no idea what the Pathfinder Rules said before they decided that spells have magic glowing runes while being cast.

The main point is that if someone is casting a spell, you can't possibly know what spell it is, unless you can see something to identify it, so if you are casting Charm Person that is kind of a hugely different thing than if you are casting Detect Magic. Because one of those should result in people being worried, and punching you to interrupt, and the other should be a common action taken during all barters involving magic items.

virgil wrote:I'm personally fine with the decision itself, but I'm frustrated at the behavior of acting as if it was something that slipped past his notice and had never been acceptable in his eyes, which is decidedly not what happened.

Yeah, I can only agree with that.

Is there a guide to building a level 1 wizard in Pathfinder somewhere in this nearly 300 page thread? I want to give advice to someone who's being told that being an elf with magic missile is optimized.

OgreBattle wrote:Is there a guide to building a level 1 wizard in Pathfinder somewhere in this nearly 300 page thread? I want to give advice to someone who's being told that being an elf with magic missile is optimized.

There's probably something buried in here, but you might also find some advice on this list of guides. Can't speak for the quality of the wizard guides, though, never used them.

Is it that complicated making a good level 1 wizard? As much Int and Con as you can afford, learn/prepare Color Spray or Sleep, make sure you've got an arcane school which lets you prepare another spell and the Improved Initiative feat and, well, you're set.

Orca wrote:Is it that complicated making a good level 1 wizard? As much Int and Con as you can afford, learn/prepare Color Spray or Sleep, make sure you've got an arcane school which lets you prepare another spell and the Improved Initiative feat and, well, you're set.

Making a 1st level Wizard in Pathfinder is very complicated, because while to actually get by at 1st level all you need is to be able to cast Color Spray and/or Sleep, you have to pick a bunch of shit like specialist subschool, arcane bond, and archetype that won't matter until level 6 or 7. Like, if you choose the Manipulator subschool of Enchantment school focus then at 8th level you get +2 to the save DCs of charm monster when you cast it at short range. But at first level, the subschool doesn't really do anything (it gives you a beguiling touch which charms creatures for one round, which is pretty much useless - at 4th level that touch actually lasts long enough for you to get your target to accept you casting another spell on them and actually matters).

I haven't gone through all the crazy options and shit. I genuinely have no idea whether you can milk enough out of Arcane Bond that you wouldn't rather get a fucking Wizard Cohort at level 1 by grabbing the Instructor Archetype.

It's all nested too, so parsing any of this shit is really hard. Imagine for the moment that you decided to be a Familiar Adept and an Enchantment (Manipulator) specialist. So at 5th level your Familiar gets to use your first level school ability. And that would be Dazing Touch for being an Enchantment specialist, but it got replaced by Beguiling Touch by the Manipulator subschool. So after being function called three times (in addition to the function call to have a familiar in the first place), you find out that your familiar gets to deliver a touch attack of save against a 2 round Charm Monster once you get to 5th level. Which is pretty good. But is it better than the other options you could have after making 3 or 4 function calls in a different direction? I have no idea. And I doubt anyone else does either.

It certainly doesn't help that these different options kick in at different levels, so that Beguiling Touch for the Manipulator Subschool starts being a thing you care about at 4th level, while the super prescience ability of the Foresight subschool kicks in at 1st level, and the Necromancy Command Undead ability requires your level to be equal to the hit dice of your total minions and thus becomes a thing that matters from level 2. Doing an apples to apples comparison is pretty much impossible. You nominally get abilities in standardized levels, but since there's no rhyme or reason about which abilities are level dependent and which are not, and some abilities are useless at the level you get them and others go obsolete very quickly and some are simply terrible and others are crazy good and so on and so forth... it's a fucking mess and no one has ever untangled it all.

-Username17