Is Pathfinder in decline? Feels like there are fewer and fewer

>>49092355
I think it's because 5th edition D&D appeals more to the more rules-light attracted people.

I hope so. Maybe we can finally bury 3.5PF for good. I'm long beyond tired of watching that shambling corpse dancing around.

>>49092434
>Maybe we can finally bury 3.5PF for good.
I wouldn't hold my breath.

>>49092355
Thankfully, yes. 5e actually delivered on all PF's promises to be 3.5, except much better.

>>49092434
>I don't like a ruleset so other people aren't allowed to like it either.

>>49092744
5e Casters are dogshit. That appeals to martialfags but nobody else.

>>49092745
> butthurt kistune-playing furryshit is angry at his game dying

>>49092761
You can still play 3.5 and be an unbeatable demigod by level 10, if you want. Just don't be surprised that majority of the players want to play Aragorn, not Doctor Strange's muggle sidekick.

>>49092773
Ranger has never been the most popular class,senpai.

No way dude. Pathfinder Online will save it

>>49092801
>shitty MMO cash grab will save ttrpg

wew lad

>>49092761
>5E is shit because it has class balance!

>>49092931
>Implying 5E classes are balanced

>>49092434
Oh look, a bitch.

>>49092943
Have you actually played and read through 5E? Because typically all of the classes are pretty equal, with casters being a bit higher, but not to the extent that PF has where they can solve every encounter with one spell.
It's not 100% balanced but it's a hell of a lot closer than 3.PF.

>>49093005
I would argue it's a little worse than this (buff champion plz) but still yeah, concentration alone did a lot to reign in the stupidity of 3.5/pf casters. The lower number of high level spell slots is also a plus.

>>49093005
Caster are slightly better IF youre minmaxing. If youre not super into optimization, everything is pretty equal. I can only think of 3 archtypes that are flat out better than everything else in 5e, but its not by a lot.

>>49092355
From a sales perspective, yes (setting aside any other issues with PF/Paizo that people might have, and which would almost certainly have an impact, large or small).

Any system will eventually encounter the same after roughly a decade or so. After long enough, the time will come for a new system to be devised. PF had a pretty good run, but from a business point of view I will be surprised if I don't see a "PF 2.0" in the next year or two years, because if I don't I suspect it will die.

>>49093061
Pretty much this. There aren't any more books Paizo can put out to support such a large team. They need to either expand into a universal system (witness Starfinder) or go PF 2.0. The latter will split their fanbasr and draw howls of outrage, but without it they're dead meat.

PF is down a little, but 3.5 in general is actually on the rise.

The two games most new players end up playing are D&D 5e and 3.5, and those games also tend to be the two that people end up returning to after trying out different games.

Most other games are either too generic or too specific/niche, so they're good for one-shots and short campaigns, but the big D&D's are almost always going to be the most played.
Even if Pathfinder and 3.5 lost 90% of their players, that's still more than most games have ever had, and with people never, ever going to be able to stop talking about it (with even bad press being good press and keeping its fame alive, especially if people just try to exaggerate how bad it is and get other people to comment about how it's actually not that bad), I don't think it's really going to be going anywhere for at least a decade.

>>49093061
>>49093153
What if it's a 5.pathfinder?

>>49093179
I think that would actually be even worse for Paizo than just a PF2.0, mostly because they rode on the back of 3.5e already and drew its audience that way. If they try and ride a hypothetical 5.PF using the same tactic then they'll doom themselves to being known as parasites from an industry perspective. They got away with it once, and did so solidly enough. A second time would stretch their credibility regarding what they call the longevity or reliability of the 3e system.

>>49093198
>the longevity or reliability of the 3e system.

3e only persisted this long because the D&D alternatives were objectively worse.
5e is a nice system with a parent company that's extremely reluctant to publish much beyond hardcover adventure books. The people currently putting out 3rd party splat are laughably bad.

3e will fade, and will only be played by aging grognards who've invested too much money in the books to do anything else.

>>49093247
As I said: what they call the longevity or reliability of the 3e system.

>>49093179
I doubt it would sell.
Pathfinder did so well because 4E was largely disliked, but 3.5 was no longer supported. 3.5 also had a million splat books so most players had invested a lot of money in the game, and suddenly all that was useless unless they stuck with 3.5. Then along comes PF, which is supported by some pretty big names, is backwards compatible with all your 3.5 stuff, and for the most part improved upon 3.5 in a lot of minor ways. Also it had less room for shit like Pun-Pun.
5E is currently being supported, draws a lot of inspiration from PF without having any of it's flaws (that's not to say it doesn't have any of it's own), and hasn't done anything to piss off it's user base.

>>49092355
God willing

>>49093005
>>49093030
I can't help but feel you think you only point of D&D is combat....

Outside of combat, a fighter is still just a mostly useless muscle man, while any kind of caster can do exponentially more things than they can. Sure, it 'wastes' a spell slot to do it (maybe), but the action economy is still fucked. Simply having the choice of something stupid like prestidigitation gives a caster way more options than a Fighter/Rogue/Ranger or whatever else.

In combat, and even without high level spells, most casters can deal more damage than your average martial.

>concentration alone did a lot to reign in the stupidity of 3.5/pf casters

So are we pretending that things like the 'War Caster' feat don't exist? There are plenty of ways to make concentration not matter. Like, I dunno, having a meat shield between you and the bad guys. Man, good thing it's hard to concentrate while that (Insert level appropriate creature here) you summoned is getting wailed on. Yup. Real hard to cast that spell while your summon is in pain.

The only real reason that 5E casters FEEL (and it is only a feeling) less powerful than their 3.5/PF counter parts is that they simply have less spell choice, this is not a balance feature. It is a side effect of 3.5/PF being a much older (though not necessarily more mature) system, Pathfinder has been out longer, so it has more spells from all 5 million splat books. Sure, a 5E caster can't cast Fly and rain down fiery death upon his enemies at level 10, but he can summon an elemental and polymorph your enemies into rabbits.

I like both systems, but claiming that either of them is 'balanced' is a bit of a long stretch.

>>49092355
As expected from a game that is almost a decade old.

>>49093247
This

>>49093363
>Outside of combat, a fighter is still just a mostly useless muscle man, while any kind of caster can do exponentially more things than they can.
All classes get the same amount of skill proficiencies, and the bulk of your proficiencies come from your race and background anyway.
Of course having spells like fly or telepathy make you much more useful outside of combat than martials could ever be, but that's an issue in every version of D&D. Pathfinder is no exception.
inb4 have you tried playing something other than D&D

>There are plenty of ways to make concentration not matter. Like, I dunno, having a meat shield between you and the bad guys.
That only stops your spells from being disrupted because you where dumb enough to cast them whilst standing next to the enemy. The real reason that concentration makes the game a lot more balanced is because you can only have 1 concentration spell active at a time. This means that you can't just fire off all of your best spells at the same time.

>The only real reason that 5E casters FEEL (and it is only a feeling) less powerful than their 3.5/PF counter parts is that they simply have less spell choice, this is not a balance feature. It is a side effect of 3.5/PF being a much older (though not necessarily more mature) system
WotC has stated that they are intentionally holding back splat books, making sure to not make the game as unbalanced, keeping people from getting too invested (monetarily) by the time 6E comes out, and making it much less unwieldy when compared to 3.5. The fact that there are less spells to choose from is a deliberate balance choice. And casters sure as hell don't just 'feel' less powerful. Any minmaxer will show you that the gap between martials and casters is a hell of a lot smaller in 5E compared to 3.PF.

>>49093363
"Balancing" casters and martials isn't something you can ever expect from D&D, I think. 4e tried to do just that, succeeded in some ways but overall it didn't went very well. To achieve some form of "balance" you'll need to nerf casters so much that it would imply very low magic setting, something D&D just doesn't do and never did. And giving every martial access to roughly the same amount of utility skills is going to blur the lines between archetypes. And that’s what classes are, archetypes. For ultimate freedom people just have to use point-buy based skill systems.

I think 5e gave us enough. Actually using skills like Insight and History is now viable for a fighter due to the way proficiency and backgrounds work. He's never going to be a skill monkey but that isn't his thing anyway.

And the main thing is not really the damage amount or anything. It's that you can actually pick corebook fucking Fighter straight out of the box without investing in feat trees you need to carefully research before picking the simplest (in theory) class in the game.

Giving the amount of various sacred cows, I think it's all we can ask and hope for from D&D.

>>49092355
Dunno globaly, but in my town less and less people are playing PF because it isn't worth it the amount of fixes to keep everybody balanced.

Though imo is kinda easy, ban core, allow 3pp

>>49094188
>allow 3pp
How could this possibly make the game more balanced?

>>49094225
Becase 3pp, specially DSP, is billion lightyears better at balance than Paizo at their own game.

In fact, I think 3pp only would be a better Pathfinder than anything Paizo released.

>>49092355

there's basically 2 players per game of pathfinder on roll20 atm, but there's a bazillion games because each player is in 15 campaigns at once.

>>49094242
I mean maybe if you restricted it to certain 3rd party publishers, then sure. Any 3PP in general would be a nightmare though.

>>49094265
I can assure you that even the shittiest stuff from 3pp has nothing on the shittiest stuff from Paizo

>>49094057
>WotC has stated that they are intentionally holding back splat books, making sure to not make the game as unbalanced, keeping people from getting too invested (monetarily) by the time 6E comes out, and making it much less unwieldy when compared to 3.5. The fact that there are less spells to choose from is a deliberate balance choice. And casters sure as hell don't just 'feel' less powerful. Any minmaxer will show you that the gap between martials and casters is a hell of a lot smaller in 5E compared to 3.PF.

The fact that WotC is holding back mechanical add-ons was Marketed as a balance choice. The real reason is because they over produced 4E, no one bought it, people got laid off, and now they just don't fucking want to. High level 5E is boring as fuck, there are no real choices to make because of that choice. That's why all the 3rd party shit and the DM's guild exist, because once you pass level 10 your character is pretty much made for you.

And even if you chose to believe WotC on the matter, the fact that the company who makes the game isn't willing to put out a type of content for the game that many people want so that they'll buy the next version of the game should be sending off red flags.

>>49094188
>ban core
I'm sorry, you w0t? So remove all the base classes that the 3pp is based on, also ban the book with the fucking rules it... are you even playing PF at that point?

>>49094068
I don't disagree, I'm just sick of the (insert system here) shills claiming that their special snowflake system, is somehow superior in balance to all others, and ALL of them love to shit on PF specifically. The only people who are worse are the ones who say their system is best, but only when you use only the splat books they like, homebrew 50% of all the content, and make way too many changes to bother keeping track of, much less to call it the same system. In essence, my main issue is people pulling the wrongbadfun card here. CONT

>>49094317
>he doesn't understand what ban core means
New in 4chan? welcome.

Ah, so you don't have this problem the next time ban core means ban core classes, why? because casters are broken and martials are underpowered.

>>49093005
Here is class list for 5e
Cleric
Bard
Wizard
.
.
.
.
Rogues
.
.
Everyone else
.
.
.
Fighters

Yeah because WotC constantly saying Dex to everything right off the bat is over powered, then just does it.

Give me 1 reason to use strength for anything mechanically.
You have Acrobatics instead of Athletics
Carry weights dont matter with magic or even a 5cp donkey cart
No one uses Str saves

>>49094275

Sacred Geometry, anyone?

>>49094317
CONT

All the systems I've ever played have had various balance issues. PF/D&D have god-mode casters, Shadowrun has it's issue with Hackers and Magical folk warping the game around them. Dark Heresy allows Tech Priests to do basically any job if they munchkin hard enough.

Really, if you have some asshole who Min/Maxes every character, that isn't the systems fault, the system can never prevent that guy from doing his thing. It can try to give him less, until suddenly he figures out that some random combination of things allows utter bullshit to happen.

Calling out for the death of a system you don't like is stupid, just don't play that system. A crazy idea, I know, but try it. I don't like GURPS, the sheer amount of shit in it seems back breaking, and I don't want to be bothered, but you wont find me starting threads to shit on GURPs, because I've got better things to do, like rant in threads shitting on PF...

Shit, why am I not just working on stuff for the game I GM?

>>49094352
Gonna be honest, I'm not really new, but hardly an old fag either, first time I've seen someone suggest it. Banning the core classes seems terribad if you have new players though, would love to know more. Also, thanks famalam-pai

>>49094358
Grapple?

>>49094408
No support for it in 5e.
Combat maneuvers have no point to exist in the system. At least in previous systems you could benefit from it without feat investment but not anymore, on top of that its still more effecient to be dex and not have to worry about it.

>>49094426
It's not always about efficiency. Sometimes you just gotta grapple everything.

>>49094426
Taking feats isn't a bad thing. Most of them suck anyway so you aren't missing out on anything if you take it. There are other ability score improvements to be had anon

>>49093153
Why would making a new version make outrage? Is that a TTRPG thing?

>>49094457
But the problem is the system does nothing to support it. It basically requires a feat just to not get punched in the face the first time and even then it is a X/day thing, which is retarded. The game may be more balanced in that Number inflation is gone but that in no way means its balanced. Melee classes still come up short in almost every regard.
Unless you can also do magic.

>>49094475
Except thats a huge issue.
The debate is
>Do i want marginally higher numbers
Or
>Do something slightly different X/day

File: 1457647877157.jpg (53KB, 500x292px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 500x292px

>>49093061
>PF 2.0
Making a second iteration of Pathfinder means the Paizo team would have to admit it's time to move on and that their game is not a flawless and perfect universal game. If there's one thing that the past 5ish years have taught me, it's that the Paizo team never, ever admits they're wrong about anything. The thought that any of them could be wrong or have made a mistake never enters any of their minds.

>>49094493
>and even then it is a X/day thing

Is that so?

>>49094490
Hamers, bitch and moan about EVERY change to a system. A nerf love tap here and suddenly the game is dying, players flocking away in droves and many cries of, im going to make my own system.

>>49094490
Well, they did build their empire on people who were playing 3.5 D&D and hated the change to the next edition.

>>49094507
Except you can do both because there are multiple ability score increases

>>49094528
Not Grapple

>>49094404
Anon, banning core classes in 3.pf has been a fairly common thing, because almost all the most problem causing classes in the game, with spare exception, are in the core book.
The only ones that get a pass are bard and sometimes rogue/barbarian.

>>49094426
>Combat maneuvers have no point to exist in the system
The standard combat maneuvers don't exist in the rules, or are ruled against?
Because every game has a reason to to use the basic combat maneuvers.

>>49094358

Good bait. Nice and sublte. Should get a lot of (you)s out of this one.

>>49094493

The point is to keep squishies from running away. Grappler just greatly expands the definition of squishy.

>>49094493
Grapple isn't x/day

>>49094658
Yeah like owlbears

>>49094358
Fighters below monks
Sensible chuckle

>>49094358
>Give me 1 reason to use strength for anything mechanically.
Deal more damage as a martial

>>49094426
>Combat maneuvers have no point to exist in the system
>Tfw Barbarian
>Tfw rage, trip and then grapple
>Tfw when enemy can't stand up because he has no movement, advantage to all my attacks, disadvantage to all his attacks forever
It's a nice way of battlefield control

>>49093153
How big is Paizo?

>>49095080
55 full-time people in the RPG dept, last they said.

Compare that to the 13 in RPGs at WOTC.

File: disappointed but not surprised.gif (345KB, 488x154px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 488x154px

>>49095134
And not a single one of them has even the slightest clue how to balance their shitty fucking game.

Pathfinder killed my systemfu, I hope it dies a painful death.

>>49093363
You clearly have not played 5e, but you tried so here's your (you)

File: Top game design.jpg (205KB, 1349x386px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 1349x386px

>>49095171
Oh, anon, but they know how to balance it, they refuse to.

>>49092355
If it dies, what will replace it?

>>49095211
4e killed itself, and the fanbase shat on itself even further.

>>49095259
I've never played 4e, I'm talking about Fantasy Craft. It was released at pretty much the same time as PF to do pretty much the same thing, but good.

>>49093363
Concentration matters, you can't have more than one power that requires Concentration active

>>49095171
Getting 5 people to agree on how to balance something is damn near impossible - hell , we have arguments between three people on /tg/ on how balanced anything is, and DSP has 5 people who can make things that still aren't balanced even with /tg/ help. 55 people can't possibly balance anything.

File: 1244744001299.png (34KB, 690x656px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 690x656px

>>49095245
>I don't really think it is healthy for the game system to wait until book 5 or 10 to go in and try to right all the wrongs of the system
So you'd rather not right them at all? Just leave those pieces on the floor, where they fell? You lazy cunt.

>nor do I think errata is the right way to go about it
You dense motherfucker errata is the best way to go about it. Just fucking release a PDF that says "Hey, we fucked up, we're fixing it, these are the new fighter, ranger, monk, paladin, and barbarian" IT'S THAT EASY

>we are stuck with them
Oh my god are you for real

>suddenly the new book becomes a must have
Or the PDF you released on the internet for free that everyone can get. For free. Easily.

>we are bound to get it wrong now and again
You've been getting it wrong right from the start.

>we are trying
WELL YOU'RE NOT TRYING VERY FUCKING HARD, ARE YOU

>>49095357
Well it's probably true. I mean, the first attempt at tampering with the core rules is Unchained and it took them forever. Paizo could really benefit from some fresh ideas right now but they're still clinging to fan-base that values familiar stuff over improvement. For almost what, 7 years now? Yeah, it's a problem.

>>49095812
What's also a problem are the dev team's gigantic fucking egos. None of them could ever admit they fucked up.

>>49092931

Games don't need balance to be good, in fact its the imbalances that make a game good.

>>49095912
>they fucked up
Thats the problem, for them it wasn't a fuck up, they wanted magic>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>martials and they went into that direction every step of the way. It was only till people complained more than bans were sent when they decided to do something.
Because yeah, they had a extrict policy of "or you suck my dick or I ban you, our system is perfect and magic is the best".

>>49095981
>It's a feature, not a bug

>>49095936
Perfect balance is unattainable, obviously. But really huge issues need to be adressed.

>>49092763

This.

>>49096174
This. Every character, whether in a classless system or otherwise, should have a role and specialty, something they're good at, something they can contribute to the group. When one character invalidates the existence of all the others, that's something that needs fixing.

>>49096133
BS
No one should be able to do everything, and no one should be feel useless.

>>49095981
Shit, I'm an amateur with minimal experience and I've made better classes than these alleged professionals. Sure, they're not perfect (and I admit they can be very powerful) but you look at it and immediately know everything it's capable of.

Meanwhile, knowing what a spellcaster is capable of requires half the damn book.

>>49093247

I still beat 15 years from now, 3.5e will STILL have the popularity it has now while people will be saying why people are playing it when DnD 6e is better.

Face it, 3.PF isn't going anywhere.

>>49092744
Except for the part where it's not very much like 3.5 at all.

>>49096250
I've seen better class design than Paizo on the business side of my toilet paper.

>>49096226
You've responded to the wrong post, mate.

>>49092943
>>49095936
well then I guess 5e is perfect, then

File: siege_weapons_far_east.jpg (531KB, 1200x1614px) Image search: [Google]

531KB, 1200x1614px

>>49092434

But 5e exists which is basically just a worse watered down 3.5 without bloat issues because they gave up on even trying to make books that weren't incongruent pieces of shit. At least you can have fun with 3.5 if you avoid core classes or limit tiers. 5e is a snooze fest made for only the most inane nerds who lap at the pussy teet of d&d.

-not virt

>>49096309
Yeah, I erased my other post due weird wording and now I can't erase this. Fuck me.

Meant to reply to this >>49095936

>>49094275
If you think that, you haven't looked at much 3pp stuff beyond DSP and couple other decent publishers. Just the SRD has shit that even paizo wouldn't print.

>>49096360
Ban core, allow psionics and tome of battle. That's the best way to avoid 3e's problems.

Hard mode: Ban core spell items like potions and wands too

Dante Must Die: And core Wondrous Items

>>49092355
D&D 5e is like Pathfinder without having to roll in shit and tie your mouse cord to your wrist.

So yes, it's dead.

>>49096423

Sounds good to me. Always had the most fun playing psionics. It's too bad theres a weird stigma against the two best books.

>>49093030
Champ's fine, chart anon ran the numbers.

For raw damage potential simplicity, they are the king. Raw, simple numbers is their nitch.

File: What the actual fuck.jpg (238KB, 1349x386px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 1349x386px

>>49094521
Yeah, they never would.

>>49096452
Yeah, from two kinds of people.

1: People that don't read the rules
2: People that think that evokers are anything but fucking useless

>>49096478
I want to invite the Paizo guys to a game.

And REPEATEDLY disrupt it and veto actions and make more rule 0 calls than a freeform RP moderator under the guise of "realism" and accuse them of pedophilia when they object.

>>49096423
>Dante Must Die: And core Wondrous Items

This kills all semblance of balance unless you use some other source, such as MIC. Other than spells, powers and core wondrous items, there are no simple sources for bonuses such as enchantment to ability scores, enchantment to natural armor, resistance to saves, etc.

>>49092801
>look this up
>great concepts
>fantastic chargen/progression
>implementation is shit for most of it, according to several sources
man, and it looked like it had potential too, sadly it's souless cashgrab shit that promises things that it can't deliver.

File: 1470421856651.jpg (314KB, 1038x1393px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 1038x1393px

>>49093363

The Fighter wrecks more pussy than some magic nerd though, don't pretend otherwise. Wizards don't get high-quality elvish waifus.

>>49096603
>Wizards don't get high-quality elvish waifus.
No, they have better waifu sources.

>>49096505
You know, normally I'd object to this sort of thing.

However, I've had to suffer from 3.PF fags that bitch and whine if you don't like their game for so long I just don't fucking care anymore.

>>49096587
What part of "Dante Must Die" confuses you?

>>49096587
Didn't Trailblazer guys show that the importance of magic items is in fact not that great?

>>49096603
>Wizards don't get high-quality elvish waifus.

Unless they focus on the Enchantment school.

>>49096603
>getting pussy
>with no Cha
Kek, nice joke, Fighterkun

>>49096642
Nope.

>>49095936

Strategic imbalances can make a game excellent. Big and slow vs small and fast, for example. Pure imbalances like big and fast vs small and slow can not.

>>49096642
Not even remotely.

>>49096282

And I predict they're going to pull all their support and put it towards the card games and the 3.PF ecosystem is going to collapse without it's #1 corporate backer.

The nice thing about predicting the future is that eventually you get to find out who was right.

>>49096360
>-not virt

Neither one of us believe you.

>>49096642
>importance of magic items is in fact not that great
If by not that great you mean fucking essential, yeah, they they're "not that great".

>>49094597

So is the entire party off-brand magic users of some kind, then? Maybe with some niche Fighterish class based around belly dancing?

Cancer on par with lesbian kitsune PCs.

>>49097762
So you'd rather have several classes pretty much be totally worthless in the face of the Wizard/Cleric/Druid overgods?

>>49092355
Until that sci-fi version comes out and renews interest, yes. Or at the very least, it's stagnant.

Let's compare it to 5e, which is dominating the fantasy RPG genre.

One of the reasons why 5e has been such a success is because it's less intimidating than Pathfinder and it's extreme number of books and extreme amount of content. It let them tap into a much broader market of more casual consumers, without the time to explore a much more saturated game, or the experience to understand all of that content (or that all of that content is unnecessary to gameplay in itself unless you consciously decide to make it necessary).

Does 5e offer fewer builds, or less potential character variety overall? Yes, but that's not something a lot of players need as an absolute prerequisite. It instead aims for consistency and functionality. Ease of access, and more people assuming a satisfying session will come out of playing the game.

In other words, 5e is more foolproof. It's harder to mess up and make a nonstarter character. It requires less meta, less game mastery, and less research to be functional--I mean, just look at the comments saying "[3.5/PF] is fine and perfectly enjoyable, just ignore all character content in the core books"--as much as that may improve the game, expecting people who by definition do not know the game's trappings to have a fun time is absolutely absurd. That in itself drives people to other systems, even if they ARE more well read and could navigate the process of salvaging 3.PF.

>>49095134
And something like half of the D&D dept. are actually there to steer its transmodal stuff--Videogames, film, other types of tabletop, etc.

>>49093043
And then 2 that are consistently suboptimal, but even then it can depend on how the gamemaster lays things out.

>>49095252

Grognard tears.

>>49093043
I can think of 2 subclasses that are completely and unadultered shit though, Wot4E monk and Beastmaster ranger

>>49096622

You can summon a succubus long enough to nut? Heh, premature ejaculator spotted. Enjoy your enslaved whore, I'll be over here swimming in prime elf muff.

>>49098010
Beastmaster is supbar always, the animal companion dies with a stern look and you have to choose between doing something or the animal doing something.

>>49096692

Works IRL.

>>49096654
>Mindrape is a substitute for love

I pity you.

>>49097860

I'd rather not play Pathfondler.

>>49098173
Well I'd agree that it is a substitute in a sense, but not a particularly good one. It's like fast food or Baldur's Gate Enhanced Edition

>>49098139
>the animal companion dies with a stern look
Exaggeration aside, I agree the animal companion's too squishy.
Less so if you're not dealing with AoEs or save-for-half attacks, both of which are far more punishing for the companion. If nothing else it needs to give the companion more health, add the Ranger's proficiency to all saves (well, aside from death saves), and it needs to specifically state that it gets death saves instead of just implying it elsewhere in the book.

>you have to choose between doing something or the animal doing something
For two levels, yes. Extra Attack at ranger level 5 lets both take actions, and then the next feature (or one after it? Don't quite recall) has it where they can take two actions while you take one (though this also makes it *more* of a target). It shouldn't take two additional levels for them to be able to feel like they're doing something.

Last time the designers had said anything about it, that I saw, they said the next experimental revision is going to have the animal companion as a core Ranger feature so they can justify more oomph in the beastmaster archetype; But, surveys also painted it as very low priority (satisfaction was high enough to surprise them despite their recognizing the Beastmaster's weakpoints) so they've been focusing on other things.

Personally I suspect we'll be seeing the playtest of it within the next 3 months or so.

>>49098201
And I'd rather not play pathshitter, but if I must, banning core is one of the most solid options there is.

>>49092434

>Burying a zombie

Pretty sure it started its existence by climbing out of the shallow grave of 3.5

File: 1439118567568.jpg (593KB, 900x1345px) Image search: [Google]

593KB, 900x1345px

>>49096603

That young innocent healer pus was some good shit though

>>49098508
>as it where they can take two actions while you take one
Recommend you to reread the subclass.

You can spend one of your attacks to give the animal the change to attack, eventually you can spend one of your attacks to give the animal multiattack (if it has it). But if you want to do another stuff that takes an Action, sorry, animal does shit. Also Animal companion can't defend itself unless you tell it to.

>>49094404
>Shadowrun has it's issue with Hackers and Magical folk warping the game around them.
It's more a playtime problem than actual power, since street sams are actually incredibly powerful in SR.

>>49098762
Derp, I was thinking 'while you take one attack action' but just didn't communicate it; I haven't had a chance to eat today and I'm really starting to feel it.

>>49093005
>49093005
>What is Inflict Wounds, no provoking AOO from casting, and no spell failure

Look who's never read the book

>>49096478
He Who Wears Mouse Cords has decided that martials are not on even footing with wizards.

I felt a great disturbance in the Path, as if a million wizards cried out at once and were silenced...or left for 5e.

>>49099339
What is concentration.

>>49094426
>No support for it in 5e.
Mother fucker doesn't know how powerful the grapple-shove lockdown is. Any Strength-based martial can easily put someone in a submission that they can't escape from and have everyone wail on their ass until they're dead.

>>49099770
Funny enough, monks, supposedly masters in the martial arts, can't do that even if their life depended on it. 5e is so fucking backwards some times.

File: 1422130766039.png (528KB, 636x449px) Image search: [Google]

528KB, 636x449px

>>49092355
Yep. Much of the simulationist appeal of 3.5 and Pathfinder has pretty much died out. The current trend of gaming favor the blend of combat and roleplaying.

>>49099962
>simulationist
But 3.5 and PF fail hard at that, you can't even do what real people are able to do even if you're a 20th level martial

>>49099973
"Simulationism" has nothing to do with "realism."

While we're shitting on Paizo, anybody got screencaps of Dancey's posts where he talks about Pathfinder Online moderation?

Specifically the ones where he says they will not be sharing any clear guidelines on behavior or punishment, and that they will only enforce their own nebulous rules at random so that people will be too afraid to act out. And of course the follow up where he called dissenters pedophiles for disagreeing with this philosophy.

>>49099973
What >>49100013 said. When people describe 3.5/Pathfinder as 'simulationist' they mean that it's designed to use rules to thoroughly track or portion out the elements of the game in execution.

>>49099973
I use simulationist in terms of attempting to codify nearly every aspect of combat via the use of numbers. whether or not the simulation is accurate to real life is purely subjective as far as I'm concerned. Hell Pathfinder has the amount of time certain armor takes to actually get on.

>>49099973

That's like complaining what a 20th level caveman can do vs a 20th level scientist.

>>49095936
In 30-something years of playing I've only seen this to be true in a way that makes the game "good" for the specific over powered players and not the group as a whole.

>>49093061
I'm wondering if they're not going to try to transfer over to Starfinder as their main product once that gets up and running. Clean things up a bit, slap some Star Wars-esque paint on it, and ship it out hoping that the masses will eat it up. Even I can't say that I'm not interested in seeing if Starfinder ends up being not a burning pile of feces.

I've been wanting a Pathfinder 2.0 made by someone else completely, but I doubt that'll ever work legally.

>>49092355

5e finally came out and it's more accessible. Now it's just a matter of porting everything to it so it can take 3.5's place as the prime version of D&D.

File: Pathfinder General.png (119KB, 1308x384px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1308x384px

>>49092355

>Is Pathfinder in decline?

>>49093043
IMO caster's SHOULD be better at higher levels. It's your reward for slugging it out at lower levels where you sucked dick compared to the martials and could die at a touch. That being said, 5e buffed casters by giving them damage cantrips so that they could be more useful at low level, so who knows any more.
Casters should have 1d4 hit die anyways :\

>>49092355
Most pathfags I know play IRL.

>>49104534
If DSP or Green Ronin or even Kobold Games made a d20 OGL game it would be well received and definitely put up some numbers even if it can't topple Paizo until they hang themselves (which I imagine Starfinder will since even the most pro-Paizo drones want rule changes).

>>49106452
Green Ronin made True20 and Mutants and Masterminds, which are both SRD derivatives.
MnM was a success, obviously, and True20 was the same system from Blue Rose, and I've seen people pleased with that on /tg/ when it wasn't being accusing of being a vehicle for some sort of vague SJW conspiracy.

Not direct ports, but it's something.

File: desu.jpg (54KB, 326x408px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 326x408px

>>49092355

tl;dr - "Why has Pathfinder been so popular when it's so terrible?"
Maybe because there are certain things about it that are not terrible and that people actually like. If you could identify those things and build an alternate system around them while leaving out or changing the parts you don't like, you could probably make a good new system. But very few people can do this because, while they can easily identify things that they hate, and provide a highly detailed list of why they hate them, they have no idea what it is that they actually like. If someone only hates things and doesn't like things, they're not going to be able to produce anything good.

>>49106982
So /tg/ WHY do people like Pathfinder?

(A cop-out answer of "because it's like 3E" isn't valid, because if someone likes PF because they liked 3E, then there's obviously something about 3E that they liked too.)

>>49107071
Wide range of potential characters. Familiar system. Well identified trap options. Optional subsystems that can help craft the game I want to run the way I want to run it. Better designed CR system that lets monsters and character be easily interchanged. Systems built for stylized games that can be mostly ported into the standardized core system (occult, vigilantes, horror). An epic system that works. The ability to move beyond 20th level (no ceiling). Easier to make characters for than Rolemaster, which has many of the same potentials, is better balanced, and takes two to three sessions to make characters in

Yes, I'm aware f the flaws, and yes, I can work around them, and no, there is not a better game for the campaigns ~I~ run than Pf currently, because Rolemaster chargen and enemy building sucks hot incubus balls.

>>49093303
>improved upon 3.5 in a lot of minor ways
It broke so much more crap than it fixed that I can't understand why pathfinder is viewed as better than 3.5

>>49104744
What's wrong with that?

>>49094358
>No one uses Str saves
Here's your (you). Here's how I can tell you haven't played.

>>49107278
>It broke so much more crap than it fixed
I've heard this many times but never heard an explanation of what it broke and how. Care to enlighten me?

>>49092763
>I don't like thing
>I like thing, and think that people should be allowed to like it.
>You're a furry.
You took too many cocaine, anon.

>>49094531
To be fair, the change they didn't like specifically was wizards getting rid of the ogl, and fucking over private writers and small companies that make only splat material.

>>49099881
Only a small mind thinks that all martial artists are monks and that all monks are martial artists.

>>49107499
A smaller mind thinks that monks are martial artists at all, instead of pasty literate religious men with bad hair who scribe books and brew beer in their monasteries.

>>49107416
"They" as in Paizo or "they" as in players? Because I'm pretty damn sure not a single player gave a fuck about the loss of the clusterfuck that was OGL.

Paizo got pissy they were dropped and saw a chance to exploit 3aboo unrest. Then they drank their own koolaid.

>>49107351
The divide between casters and martials is even worse in Pathfinder than it is in 3.5. The removal of concentration as a skill to hurt casters was negated by the addition of a flying skill.

System changes in PF make it even more miserable to be a rogue. For all the tweaking they did to the monk, they didn't improve its standing and then piled on nerfs.

CMD, while a decent attempt at curbing the size bonuses that always plagued martials trying to perform maneuvers, is negated by the splitting of maneuver feats into longer chains than they were previously, and the actual CMD numbers on monsters are still out of control (though CMD actually kinda works better for balance if you back-port it to 3.5 monsters).

There's probably more but I haven't bothered with PF in awhile.

>>49107629
Concentration checks are worse than the concentration skill was. A caster could boost his concentration skill out the ass. It's a fuckload harder to boost your concentration checks.

Rogues had to be rebuilt, and even then they introduced some better than rogue rogues n the form of the alchemist, investigator, and the slayer.

CMD is terrible for fighting monsters. It's great for fighting other people. Not every campaign is big-monster-centric.

There's more, but it doesn't matter.

>>49107791
>Concentration checks are worse than the concentration skill was. A caster could boost his concentration skill out the ass. It's a fuckload harder to boost your concentration checks.

The change to concentration didn't fix anything though. It changed the tactics of casters every so slightly and pushed them more toward the back-line niche, making melee combat as a whole a worse proposition for a player than it already was.

Why did they give casters a flying skill and not make stuff like the fighter proficient in it?

>>49107629
Only rogues got fucked over as far as martials are concerned. Monks still suck, but they were awful in 3.5 as well. Paladins got hugely buffed. Rangers got better. Fighters got better. Barbs got a bit better. Uberchargers and Bighuge McSpikedchain man were essentially removed for obvious reasons, but hardcore minmaxers still consider it a martial "nerf".

Pretty much all the core casting classes got their power trimmed substantially. CoDzilla got taken down a few pegs (especially if you consider Divine Metamagic to be a core part of the build). A lot of the most bullshit spells got gutted (polymorph, force cage) or were removed entirely (whole celerity line). That's before you get into the truly heinous cheese that no longer exists -- Shadowcraft Mage, caster level loops, etc.

>>49092763
Fucking THIS