Why does everyone hate it now?

>>54383527
Because the developers are fucking idiots, mostly.

>>54383527
>Everyone
It's still a popular game, it's just that /tg/ is edition war central so everyone has to autistically screech at each other.

>>54383527
Too many trannies. Expect that shit game they've announced to flop.

>>54383728
This

I don't want any games I play promoting mental illness.

Because it's the same old sack of diarrhoea 3.5 was all along, and for some reason 5e doesn't irritate the grog 'tism like 4e did

4e is still the superior game

File: Pathfinder and 5E.jpg (283KB, 983x911px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 983x911px

>>54383527
Feature creep eventually turning it into a cesspit of special snowflake furshit races, anime classes (Magical Child, really?), and creating skill synergies that required autistic levels of actually STUDYING how to min-max the game to keep your character useful (rendering the game impenetrable to newcomers).

5e came along, and while still garbage by virtue of being a D20 derivative, still managed to go a long way towards fixing many of those Pathfinder problem.

This isn't even me shilling, as I actively dislike BOTH systems and would like to think that actually makes me fairly objective here.

>>54383750
This image doesn't seem biased at all.

>>54383527
Now?

File: DnD SJWs.png (231KB, 680x555px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 680x555px

>>54383773
I have a fair share of DnD cringe images saved too, if it makes you feel better.

>>54383773
it really isn't

>>54383749
>4e

boy do I love the entire game revolving around combat, and yet waiting nineteen and a half decades for my god damn turn to come around.

>>54383783
That's spinning off topic, but goddamn the college system needs a reform.

>>54383790
I've got the core books for both, so don't try and be pithy with me.

Wait did /tg/ use to like it?
The problems were evident from the fucking start in making the skill system that was 3es biggest flaw (3e is my favorite system and even I know the skill point alocation is trash) even fucking worse. among other things I am to tired to remember

>>54383795
>waiting 19 and a half decades for your turn
Have you tried not playing with the mentally challenged? D&D has revolved around combat since its inception.

Also, it beats just having the faggot in a bathrobe cast Sleep and the entire "fight" just being the party wandering around sticking knives into the fallen.

I love their modules and adventure paths but hate the actual rules, way way too crunchy for my groups taste, no one in our party knew the rules off by heart so we always had to stop and look shit up and it broke the flow. thats really my only problem with it there was just way too much shit if they did a pathfinder v2 lite or some shit id probably start again

File: Pathfinder Player tries 5e.png (229KB, 525x248px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 525x248px

>>54383773
Just because you don't like the facts doesn't mean they're biased. Go back to your containment general.

>>54383823
No actual weeb is gonna like kitsune in PF because they're a race that defaults to an anthro/furry appearance. That puts off most weebs like it does everyone. Pretty much only furries pick it, and they don't care if it's Japanese-themed or not.

File: Pathfinder gENERAL.png (349KB, 1600x491px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 1600x491px

>>54383911
Does it really matter? In terms of the player base quality?

>>54383626
This, basically.
If you bother to listen to the system war trolls, you'll start to think /tg/ hates every game.

Don't judge /tg/ by the worst of us.

File: DM_apologizes_for_his_Magical_Realm.jpg (39KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 1280x720px

>>54383911
They're shapeshifters that can "default" to any form they want... so if weebs wana play their retarded high school fox girl waifus, they're gonna play their retarded high school foxgirl waifus.

>(voice cracking) MY BUILD

>>54383527
Because it's 3.5, but with even worse playerbase. This is pretty bad.
>>54383750
Oh, I've made this. Wish I made a little bit more effort.

>>54383613

Greatest fpbp of all time.

File: 1477719382969.jpg (36KB, 357x368px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 357x368px

Because it's a bloated mess and because the creators are pandering retards who care more about pleasing SJWs and shitting out unbalanced splatbooks than creating a consistent setting and a well designed system.

>no new classes for a while after Ultimate combat
>"We don't want to flood the game with too many choices guyz"
>suddenly Advanced Class Guide
>then Occultish Adventures
>then Ultimate Intrigue
>somewhere in there Unchained comes out to (un)fuck up some of the core classes
It's just a clusterfuck at this point.

It's always been shit, and the few people that weren't shit-spewing autists moved to 5E

>>54383527
Because is 3.5 with even more caster supremacy. For fucks sakes martials can't even grapple or trip shit anymore due the CMD powercreep

Man, even in 3.5 you could build good martials (arcane shapechanger ranger, monk/psywar, etc) but all those options didn't translate to PF in where martials are crap

>>54384415
what if your master just select 5 books and that's what you use to build your class?

back when i started the core book plus the first 2 books allowed me to do one gorillion classes without much confusion.

>>54383795
Have you tried playing with a good DM? Good players? Being good yourself?

>takes 3.5 up to eleven and makes it even worse and less bearable
>no coherent and focused game design, just a mix of mismatched ideas from 2 decades ago kept alive by grogs
>blobbing
>shit tier art
>devs openly displaying statements of extreme retardation
>community made up from degenerate autists who do not just need to erp as lesbian kitsunes, but also need to theorycraft silly builds for those
>general theorycrafting/powerbuilding cancer
>competitiveness, gamist elitism, "mastering the system", ivory tower etc.
>default setting that makes forgotten realms seem like a coherent, well designed world

>>54383963
>Don't judge /tg/ by the worst of us.
I will when these edition wars threads tend to have 50-100 unique IP's and consistently reaches bump limit more often than not.

>>54383527
>Invite new blood to the hobby

>New blood are intimidated by horrible and pointless rules

>New blood choose lighter systems

shock and horror.

5e base is basically the normies that decided TTRPGs were cool because it was on an episode of Big Bang Theory and try to play out a character from a TV show, then get annoyed because they didn't read the rules.

PF base is either number crunch fiends or super-animu-please-don't-talk-to-me-about-it-I-don't-care levels of weeb that they smell of "that guy".

Both player bases are autistic as fuck because they believe they have the superior system even though at the end of the day, monster were killed and you (hopefully) played a character that isn't an extension of yourself.

>>54385071
Expectation
>Invite new blood to the hobby
>New blood are intimidated by horrible and pointless rules
>New blood choose lighter systems
Reality
>Invite new blood to the hobby
>New blood wastes hours upon hours of time trying to understand the horrible and pointless rules because it's the only thing people are running
>New blood ends up sticking to one system because they think every game is going to require a similar amount of hours to understand horrible and pointless rules
Sad but true.

>>54385149
>you (hopefully) played a character that isn't an extension of yourself.
Every character is an extension of yourself in some capacity though, it's why so many people have trouble playing high INT/CHA characters.

File: 1476084347588.jpg (8KB, 209x212px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 209x212px

>>54385151
Nope.

The amount of people I know that went from starting with 5e to GURPs is shockingly high. Their campaigns are even more disjointed than the ones they started with.

>>54385149
>at the end of the day, monster were killed
mfw

>>54385189
>The amount of people I know that went from starting with 5e to GURPs is shockingly high.
Congrats, has nothing to do with reality though, but congrats.

Just play 3.5 with Die Stygian Jackal Rules and ban some spells that solve quests or lower their damage.

Just fixed D&D. Have fun.

File: 1487233302992.jpg (37KB, 750x709px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 750x709px

>>54385213
>It's another "I just fixed D&D" retard going on about shitty house rules that probably don't even work.

>>54385213
Holy shit rogues and monks suck with those rules

>>54383527
At it's core, it's... good ? It's mostly the mess of unrelated and bad supplements that brings the hate...

>>54385272
Is basically a binary game, if you get hit you die, if you don't you survive one extra turn. Sadly everybody has shit AC, so is a meatgrinder of the highest degree

>>54385295
>core
>good
Only if you play caster.

>>54385272
Rogues and Monks suck shit regardless, so what's the difference?

>>54385318
it was a "meh good", it's just that it works, might not be the best but it does the job at giving a coherent frame to play(and casters are obviously way more fun to play, it's true)

>>54383527

Basically lots of people on forums who didn't really play D&D 3.5 but just engaged in endless white box dpr calculations and whined 'imbalance' that didn't really come up in actual play on forums anyway. Wotc actually took these whingers seriously and designed 4E to resolve the complaints of people who didn't even play D&D.

It was a mess of a system that played out like a tactical miniatures skirmish game , enforced grid combat that took hours to resolve, mmo design mechanics with literal clickable abilities with cooldowns , had no space for roleplay in the midst of endless fight, players had insane power levels from.level 1 and were effectively all self healing wizards and it plainly wasn't D&D. All the players who had actually been enjoying D&D suddenly came out of the woodwork to say that this edition was pure trash.

Pathfinder came and rescued all the players who actually still enjoyed playing D&D and not World of Warcraft the tabletop game by updating 3.5 with a bunch of cool tweaked, streamlining and features.

5E came and wotc actually decided to design it to play out like D&D. It's simple and easy to play and streamlines everything while keeping the game still fundamentally D&D. Unfortunately they'd blown all their budget on 4E so multiple rules are missing with the excuse of 'just homebrew it lol' . Meaning when you want to resolve a bunch of basic stuff like a persuasion check you have to look up the far superior Pathfinder rules but then that doesn't work with the wonky advantage/disadvantage system. So you have to write half the game for them. Still it's better than 4E at least ( not that that's hard )

So Pathfinder still remains the best edition of D&D with 5E is easy mode introduction for new players. Those same white box forum whingers who don't actually play D&D however still like to complain so pretend Pathfinder has a bunch of issues it doesn't in actual play still and the cycle continues.

>>54385365
>and casters are obviously way more fun to play, it's true
THIS!
Martials
>Roll attack each turn until target is dead.
Casters
>Pick from over 100 unique spells to defeat your enemies with arcane might.
I mean, there's a reason why most of the book is dedicated to magic.

>>54385322
So what you say is that those rules don't fix the game...which enters in contradiction with what you said here >>54385213

>>54385423
>roleplaying game where you can literally do anything you want in game. Options are infinite

>Boring because I don't have a list of things telling me what I can do

>Go back to skyrim

Rifts is the greatest rpg system of all time.

>>54385462
>Options are infinite
And martials among those infinite options can choose 1 or two, because if they choose to do something original they provoke attack of oportunity and fail at whatever they want to do because they don't have the feats needed for that. Is like you didn't even play the game.

>>54385375
Just to add that even if D&D 4E is not D&D, it's actually a really good tabletop game. During some holidays, I played against a friend with warband vs warband type of game (player characters but also monsters and stuff) and it was great and interesting.

>>54383527
Why did anyone not hate it?

>>54385462
>Pushing the "you can do anything" meme
I wish I could slap the shit out of whoever started pushing this shit onto the hobby because it has generated more bullshit than anything else that WotC has produced in the last 10-20 years.

You can't do anything you want, otherwise you could play as a 900 year old kitsune loli sorcerer/dragon disciple in a gritty medieval fantasy campaign without getting a few dirty looks from the rest of the table (assuming they don't kick you on principle).

The reality is that what you can and cannot do has always been determined by both the game and the table, because while some people don't mind describing how a petite fox girl is giving the crusty wizard a handy under the table, other tables might not be nearly as amused by the description.

And if you cannot handle that, let me direct you to where you truly belong >>>/v/

>>54385489
What rules did you use?

>>54385483
>What are combat maneuvers? (a bloo bloo I might get attacked with my huge defences and hit points if I try one without feats to specialise )

>literally hundreds of unique weapons all of which can change how you fight in a combat

>Literally infinite actions you can describe in combat all with unique effects based on the environment, your opponents and your allies.

>>54385489
I'm never going to understand the whole 4e is not D&D thing.

>>54385573
>What are combat maneuvers?
Trap options that noobs and morons invest in until they realize that they can't use them once they start fighting non-humanoid creatures.
>literally hundreds of unique weapons
Yet the bulk of these weapons will never be used because the martial spent most of his feats off of increasing the damage of his base weapon or you'll end up trading it in for a magical weapon that's an improvement in every single way.
>Literally infinite actions you can describe in combat
Yes, because "mother, may I?" is the height of strategy when the mage has options that actually have rules beyond "meh, I'm in a good mood, so you get a +X bonus and the enemy's stunned or whatever, I guess" that actually shape the battlefield for the environment, you opponents, and your allies.

Give it a rest.

>>54385573
>What are combat maneuvers? (a bloo bloo I might get attacked with my huge defences and hit points if I try one without feats to specialise )
No, you might get attacked and you lack the +4 bonus. Even with that measily +4 most creatures are going to say Nope, because their bloated CMD. You didn't play the game.

>literally hundreds of unique weapons all of which can change how you fight in a combat
Exotic all of them.

>Literally infinite actions you can describe in combat all with unique effects based on the environment, your opponents and your allies.
Only if the GM decides to give you such effects because those are nor stated in the rules nor in your class features so you're playing a mother may I game with no back up in the system.

Yep, you don't actually play, it shows. Go back to whatever rules light game you're playing.

>>54384547
>For fucks sakes martials can't even grapple or trip shit anymore due the CMD powercreep
t. cannot play th game (or do math)
We have been over this. You are full of shit.

The developers are even dumber than this poster, tough.

>>54385600
It's because 4e is actually good anon.

>>54385619
>>54385636
Don't reply, it's bait.

>>54385531
Well simply the original 4th edition rules for handling combat and some of the first supplements (not that much). We did stuff like 5 vs 5 adventurers of level X and we had a gold budget to buy items. Later we added other things like mercenaries to try a bit more the bestiary. It's not quick to put in motion but it was fun. We also strictly sticked to the rule (no "I try to do this wacky cool thing")

>>54385653
My monk, which gets maneuver bonus feats, can't trip shit at 10th level, only weak ass enemies that actually die of 1 hit making the trip attack a waste. I have Imp Trip and +4 to Str, +2 from Dex (because I have a feat that adds Dex to maneuvers), plus bonus from magic weapon. Please, tell me what am I doing wrong?

>>54385683
>Please, tell me what am I doing wrong?
Playing PF.

>>54385600
4e isn't 3.5

3.5 was so monolithic thanks to the OGL that for most D&D players it represents the end-all-be-all of D&D

Therefore 4e isn't D&D

>>54385600
it's just that the game design is way more different that 2/3/3.5/5 (never played the first, so I don't know), and is way more focused on giving a strict frame to play within rather than a more or less opened one.

>>54385672
>We did stuff like 5 vs 5 adventurers of level X and we had a gold budget to buy items.

At what levels?

Sound like the setup time is a bitch, especially using the books instead of the character builder/without simple essentials stuff.

Also, imbalanced as fuck if you don't put some sort of limit on dailies... and even then, optimized characters are easily capable of oneshotting each-other.

>>54385655
But so was Basic, and so was 2e. Well, Basic, 2e, and 4th were the only editions I've actually played so I can't really say anything about 3.PF or 5th so they might be good to.

>>54385704
4e has the best rules for supporting improvised actions.

>>54383527
There was a time when it wasn't?

I hated it the moment I tried it, I was promised 3.5 but with the stupid fixed, I got 3.5 with the stupid moved around and more stupid added, I have never been so disappointed by an RPG before or since

>>54383773
I remember the week that image was made. Anon was not cherry-picking; those were really all the most recent OP images at the time.

i bought it when i started getting into RPGS simply because i heard 4e dnd was so bad butr i'm not buying another set of books

>>54385683
>Playing monk
If you want to do maneuvers play fighter or barbarian, monk is not for that.

>>54385715
[citation needed]

Seriously, 4e was the edition that most discouraged improvised actions because they weren't the designated powers on your hotbar.

>>54385683
What's your total CMB bonus at lvl 10th?

>>54385715
You liar

It has the best rules for not actively discouraging improvised actions, that's not the same thing as encouraging improvised actions

>>54385802
DMG pg42 good enough citation for you?

>>54385802
3.x ties your improvised actions to shit like combat maneuvers and skill checks with stupidly high DCs that are set up to fail, and when you fail you get punished for trying.

Sometimes even before it.

Other editions tell the DM to just wing it.

4e actually has good DM advice with rules support for using improvised actions, giving you a handy table and a list of effects.

>Seriously, 4e was the edition that most discouraged improvised actions because they weren't the designated powers on your hotbar.

I add it to the "hotbar" with an "improvise an action! The DM will love you for it!" power card.

>>54385823
That's fair, I guess. I usually play with inherent bonuses and step it up a bit from what the table recommends, which makes them a pretty ok alternative, but taking them at face value does make improvised actions a lot weaker.

>>54385820
7 from BaB
5 from Str (actual str + magic enhacement)
2 from Dex
2 from feat
1 from AoMF
Total : 17

>>54385043
But it's always just about five people bumping the thread, thirty people telling them they're idiots, and twenty newfags.

And, these threads really don't compare to the threads that actually just want to discuss the games, like the generals.

Don't judge us by the worst of us.

>>54385848
>+2/-2 for favorable/unfavorable circumstances (like in 3E)
>roll a skill check that fits (like in AD&D or 3E)
>the rest of the page is dedicated to how much damage it does

"Improvised actions" shouldn't predominantly be "more ways to harm people".

Plus the other rules go way back. Check out Moldvay B60, the sections:
>"That's not in the rules!"
and
>"There's always a chance."

Much more flexible rules and advice for improvised actions.

I started taking a serious interest in running Pathfinder, but all the SJW shit seriously turned me off. I realize it's practically a meme, but I'm not even joking.

You can't even throw a stone without tripping over muh diversity, and by all accounts, Starfinder will be even worse.

I may give 5e a lot of shit and I may actually prefer a lot of what Pathfinder tries to do (I do, in fact, enjoy granularity when it comes to mechanical-narrative interactions and an overwhelming amount of options when it comes to representing your character in a mechanical sense) but at least WotC doesn't seem to be playing the cultural war game as hard.

>I can't troll the /4eg/ anymore
>instead I'll try to start edition wars in other threads!

>>54385887
>>54385683
>Adds dex AND Str to CMB
I don't recognize that feat, is it paizo's?

>>54385925
>And, these threads really don't compare to the threads that actually just want to discuss the games, like the generals.
You're not really helping your case pal.

>>54385938
If it doesn't do damage then just use the DC. If it's not something you intend on rolling for, let 'em have it for free. It's not hard if you aren't a dribbling mongo.

I just joined a PF group and I had the most enjoyable session in a good while.

I would not recommend PF to anyone because I'm spending days optimizing my character, reading through literally hundreds of feats and traits, spread over a dozen books without looking at 3rd party content.

>>54383750
>still garbage by virtue of being a D20 derivative
Are there any d100/d% games of the high fantasy kind with massive amounts of options á la 3.5/PF?

I've always preferred WFRP2, Call of Cthulhu/Delta Green, Eclipse Phase, etc.

I just want to scratch a kill-the-dragon/save-the-princess android Paladin riding an enlarged corgi itch that I've had for a while. But the only options I really see are DnD, DnD, DnD, DnD and Pathfinder.

Everything else seems tragically archaic, hodge-podge, have the production value of a Bic Mac, or just plain bad.

>>54385881
You seem to not understand the "hotbar" complaint. Much like 3.X punished you for trying something without having the right feat for it, 4e characters are completely dependent on their powers. When you're doing anything that isn't a power written on your character sheet, you're somewhere between weaker and completely useless. 4e did try to describe how to adjudicate improvised actions, but it was completely oblivious to the built-in systemic reasons why nobody will use them.

>>54386049
RuneQuest?

>>54386049
Mythras Classic Fantasy

>>54386047
It's so weird that PF players seem to treat accepting all 3rd party content as the default. Like, /pfg/ actually tells people that they have to specify if third-party content is NOT allowed. As though they didn't have enough mountains of splat already.

>>54385990
No, it was something I begged my DM for because I saw it in a 3.pp stuff. Our game started with 20 point buy and I couldn't afford 13 Int so I can't pick the Greater Trip feat so to compensate I begger my GM to add Dex, I still can't trip shit worth tripping and not only because they're 2 size categories bigger ( have ki throw that for 2 ki points allows me to trip huge creatuers, 3 ki points for gargantuan and 4 for colossal)

>>54384026
>Because it's 3.5, but with even worse playerbase.
It's pretty fucking bad. The /pfg/ is pretty fucking horrid. I kinda want to play Pathfinder, but the player base ruins it for me. The general is 75% trash, 10% unrelated and perhaps 15% that's relevant to the actual game, discussing issues and ideas and rules. Questions routinely gets just flat-out ignored, because people are too busy namefagging and talking about having sex with the latest application character for some game nobody gives a shit about.

>>54386057
>4e did try to describe how to adjudicate improvised actions, but it was completely oblivious to the built-in systemic reasons why nobody will use them.

4e describes how it's supposed to work, and if you use inherent bonuses+adjust for optimization level, it does.

It doesn't work as well out of the box as the parts of the system that got more focus, but it's nowhere near useless; not to the degree it is in 3.x or 5e anyway.

>>54386092
The 3rd party stuff is usually more mechanically sound than anything Paizo puts out.

>>54386116
This, everytime I have a doubt with the rules it gets ignored for several threads even when I spam it every 4 hours

>>54386092
Because 1pp is trash if you play martials or anything that isn't wizard, druid, cleric and arcanist. 3pp has options for those who don't want to be full casters.

>>54386057
>When you're doing anything that isn't a power written on your character sheet, you're somewhere between weaker and completely useless.

It was more transparent too. While I'm sure 3.x and PF fans took a while to figure out how to master the system ("Why aren't you charging?" is one I remember hearing a lot), it was visible in 4E from the start.

In my first game we were fighting some kobolds. I said I wanted to walk over and hit one with my sword. The DM told me I had to say which power I was using. I said I just wanted to attack (apparently Basic Attacks weren't a thing until a later book). In the end I ended up using some shield power that did nothing. And then every turn, I kept using that shield power.

I know combat has a different tone to other editions, but I find it pretty funny that these characters are uttering a prayer or calling on their deity or re-studying the enemy every 6 seconds.

>>54385887
what is the average CMD of monsters of GS 6-10?

>>54386133
>>54386178
> my game with literally over a dozen books linked in the sidebar is shit without 3pp

>>54386092
>It's so weird that PF players seem to treat accepting all 3rd party content as the default.

It is. I'm not sure if it's just on /tg/ or if this goes for most players, but the relative power levels and stuff on /pfg/ is completely fucking absurd, and people whine incessantly if a game goes up and it's not gestalt. It's just complete, unhinged powergaming, watching all the numbers rise, tallying them together in some autism-fueled lesson in futility and meaninglessness.

At that point, you might as well just make shit up on the spot and call it 3pp content, but if you say that, the autists go full-on fucking reeee on you because of it. Like the fact that someone published something somewhere once somehow makes it more legitimate. It's insane.

>>54386203
>In my first game we were fighting some kobolds. I said I wanted to walk over and hit one with my sword. The DM told me I had to say which power I was using.
Your DM is an absolute idiot.

>>54383527
It has flaws and /tg/ loves to call those out.

>>54386203
>apparently Basic Attacks weren't a thing until a later book

...

you and your DM are both retarded, or at least have 0 knowledge of how the game works.

this explains a lot

>>54386203
>Apparently basic attacks weren't a thing until a later book

What?

>>54386257
What would a better DM have done?

Also this was when 4E first came out, so a lot of the fixes people talk about hadn't been explored yet.

Plus I didn't want to be an asshole to the other players. From their point of view, I could have attacked AND gave someone a bonus, let them spend a healing surge, pushed the enemy away, etc. I probably came across as petty when I just didn't understand the system yet.

>>54386216
Not him but
CR 10 has average 33 CMD
CR 9 has average 30 CMD
CR 8 has average 28 CMD
CR 7 has average 26 CMD
CR 6 has average 24 CMD

>>54386233
To be fair, there's a LOT of shitty house rules like >>54385213 and >>54385684 floating around that claim to "fix D&D" and end up doing anything but.

I wouldn't accept an unpublished house rule either for m campaign if we're being honest and I don't even play 3.PF anymore.

>>54386226
Doesn't matter you have a dozen or 5 gorillion books if they all have shit unless you're a full caster.

>>54385705
it's been some times ago so I don't remember everything. I think we used mostly character under level 10, because we ended up trying parangonic character by the end as "big team" (so between 10 and 20). Also easier to set up in term of leveling each character.

I remember that daily were indeed really strong, so we went for a several rounds system, so you needed to use them more sparsely.

We played like that only during a week (and also doing other stuff) so we didn't have the opportunity to really create a meta and see all the imbalance, it was mostly for fun.

>>54386280
>>54386285
My bad, just spotted it in the PHB (page 287).

I think I'm getting confused because later on we used a program that let you select and print out all your character's powers, and Basic Attack was an optional feature.

>>54386233
The 3PP content that /pfg/ recommends is (usually) infinitely better balanced than half the shit Paizo drops. DSP stuff only gets you to a nice comfy t3-4 game, where everyone is pretty powerful but doesn't usually have really game-breaking tools, aside from sometimes doing a lot of damage.

>>54386299
>What would a better DM have done?
You can make a basic attack if you want, it's just not as good as using a power because a lot of powers allow you to do something extra with your attack roll or have effects even if you fail to hit a dude.

There's nothing stopping you from going "I attack with my sword," the DM was just a fucking idiot who drank the "you can only do something if it's a power" kool-aid that 3aboos have been spouting since 4e came out.

>>54386302
First and foremost, a 10th level monk adds 10, not 7. So is +20

Then we see without bonus from tons of spells, flanking, positions, other classes like cavalier and bard, you pull off a trip against a CR10 with a 14, and against a CR 6 (still dangerous mook) with a 4.

And this is with the Monk, the worst designed class.
Charade you are.

>>54383527
I like it for all the snowflake options, but other than that, it does not particularly inspire me.

>>54386302
And shit gets worse, at CR 20 a monster has on average 66 CMD

Lets assume you have 30 str (+10), 20 Bab (+20), Imp trip (+2) and Greater trip (+2), +5 weapon (+5), whatever magic item that adds to trip?? (+4), you still get +43 to CMB, you will need to roll 23 on a d20 to trip that CR 20 creature

File: unknown[1].png (1MB, 1420x923px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1420x923px

>>54386135
Same. I keep trying to get discussions going and discuss reasonable ways to make concepts work or asking questions if X work, and it either gets ignored, or I get told that my concept is shit and that a completely different concept would obviously be superior.

Like, bitch, I'm trying to make a concept work because I want to play something fun, it's not all about the optimization. If I was just trying to optimize, I wouldn't be playing this character, I'd be playing a pure Aasimar Cleric or something.

If we could gas all the legitimate autists and all the SJW, I think Pathfinder could actually be a lot of fun. But I can't even get my usual groups to consider trying Pathfinder, because of how cancerous everything surrounding the fanbase and the game is. It also doesn't help that Golarion is actually the most shallow kitchen-sink setting known to man, and nobody fancies creating a whole new setting, especially not when they want to run Adventure Paths.

>>54386460
>>54386409
Whatever you are fighting at that level will be immune to trip anyway because no feet/too many feet/flying 90% of the time.

>>54386380
Saying "DSP is allowed" is not the same thing as saying X, Y, Z, A, B, C is allowed, or that 3pp is allowed, just.. "3pp". Reading /pfg/, 3pp is legit by default, whereas everywhere else I go, 3pp is usually something considered on a case-by-case basis.

>>54386409
>First and foremost, a 10th level monk adds 10, not 7.
What?
>http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk
>level 10
>+7/+2

>Then we see without bonus from tons of spells, flanking, positions, other classes
So shit that the Monk either doesn't have by default and depends on other members of the party. Okay, whatever you say man.

>>54386503
Monk has a feature that lets you combat maneuver using your monk level instead of your BAB.

You may have traded it away since it's fucking useless though.

>>54386460
You suck at middle level. At level 20, you can afford stuff buffing you with true strike for those challenges. Add 20 to your calculation.

>>54386503
You automatically lost any argument because is clear you don't even know the fucking class you are playing.
I suppose is not "your" monk, you don't even play the game, or you would be aware of the many workarounds by now. You just pickd up the monk thinking is an easy target.

>>54386409
>If everybody pumps spells on me and we have every needed class I can try to do something and will still need a 14+
And CR 6 is a joke (average HPs 65) for a 10th level char, you can pretty much kill it with two attacks, literally no need to trip it. Also average doesn't mean highest, among average is also weak ass monsters that are casters and don't attack you and don't even have high AC so tripping them doesn't do much.

>>54386483
And those monsters have a laundry list of immunities to energy drain, mind-affecting, energy and whatnot. Your point?
High level challenges should be just low level one with bigger numbers?
Go back playing 4th.

File: (you).jpg (5KB, 234x230px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 234x230px

>>54386537
>You're wrong
>Not going to explain why
>but YOU'RE WRONG
Kk senpai, whatever you say.

>>54386520
>magic item creation rules
Never ever seen anyone allow those, and oh god I want a righ of swift action true strike so hard

>>54383795
>boy do I love the entire game revolving around combat
as opposed to...???

>>54386462
Man, that is a lot of words for an NPC.

Also I'm pretty sure that's not how pronouns for transgender people are supposed to work.

>>54386407
Why would you, though? "I hit it with my sword" makes thematic and contextual sense, but in the rules, it would be retarded to do that if you can use a super-flashy weaboo fighting magic attack.

>>54386555
Why should I invest in a combat maneuver that's going to become worthless past level 5, when I can instead focus all of my resources towards improving my attack/damage so that I can not only hit a dude, but make it hurt as well?

Honest question, because you can't get rid of a feat as easily as you can a spell and I'm not going to invest in anything that has planned obsolescence built into it.

>>54383527
Because the core rules were barely changed from 3.5e, and are fucking horrid. The action economy is horrid, the anime-like scaling on everything is horrid, the Christmas tree magic item bullshit, and wealth by level shit is horrid. To mention a few favourites.

It's just that the people who have been playing it non-stop since 3.5e are blind to it.
But you've been treating it like it was the best TTRPG through the whole of 4e (where it was arguably an entiely different game), while all of the Old School Revival has going on (in their attempt to find what was really great about D&D from before it turned into such a huge mess) and turned into dozens upon dozens of creative endeavours spanning not only retro-clones, but also many new systems that marry old philosophy with new approaches, and through the development and maturation of 5e.

In this new age you've missed, the rest of the hobby has evolved through the innovations and refinements of ideas both new and old.
D&D alternatives are a dime a dozen now, and many of them are actually very good. Most of have found ways to do exactly the same or more, with simpler and less clunky rules, with smoother gameplay, and at no cost to depth other than a lower page count.
Most have better content curation, but more importantly, are modular and less fiddly; staggeringly easy to homebrew for.

Turns out that having thousands of options made by clowns, with no guarantee that they're worth your effort to even read, isn't actually a strength.
But that's what you've all been saying for years, while everything else has been moving on without you.

At least those of you who've cracked the code and have learned to sift through the shit and turn the gems into usable characters or monsters, get to have your... quintuple multiclass triple halfbreed kitsune prestige class giant kawaii uguu hulking hurler abominations? I guess?

Have fun with that, though.

>>54386409
>martials are viable, casters aren't all
>needs casters to cast shit on him to be able to perform stuff more or less ok (not even 50% of the time will succeed)
Thanks for conceding that PF is caster supremacy shit and that martials are useless without casters handholding them through the game

>>54386563
Exploring dungeons!

>>54386280
It is true that several classes essentially couldn't make basic attacks, and therefore opportunity attacks and extra attacks granted by other classes, until they released that tax/patch feat

>>54386588
My favourite part is where the character is just suddenly referred to as "she" after he starts wearing woman's clothing, and he even gets a girlfriend later which is apparently completely normal. It's like.. it's not even transgender, he's just a crossdresser and it's treated as if it's fucking normal and normal in the context of the universe yet it makes no fucking sense.

Not even gender-bender magic. What's worse is that there's absolutely no fucking reason to have this character be this way. It adds nothing. It's just there for snowflakery and faggotry, like an apropos nothing, like a parenthesis. It's just there to force-feed you SJW trash, serving no narrative or thematic purpose whatsoever. Unless you want to have the party rape her and discover that she's got a dick, but if you're degenerate enough to do that, you probably deserve Paizo.

>>54386603
To illustrate your point, I almost feel that several supplements are just bad homebrews that were simply put with a nice page layout to give it credibility.

>>54385375
>Unfortunately they'd blown all their budget on 4E so multiple rules are missing with the excuse of 'just homebrew it lol
Alright the majority of this is stupid, but this part is just surreal

>>54386061
>>54386082
At a glance, they both seem to fall into the whole production value of a Big Mac category, tbqh.

>>54386671
At least the broken leg is actually a nice idea

>>54386664
>>54386280
In 4e, good basic attacks were a feature of having high STR or DEX, and part of the game balance.
Adding those feats gave people the freedom to make character builds that were good at making extra basic attacks despite having a different main stat (like WIS or whatever), but adding those feats to the game was by no means necessary for their actual class to make sense. Except for the swordmage, which came with their own version of that feat; and even for them, it was not strictly necessary. It was just nice to be able to combo with a warlord, or to make use of items that granted extra attacks, and so on.

It's not like classes didn't have at-will attack powers for their main stat or something. They did; and several to choose from.

File: 89834_donald-trump-laughing.jpg (46KB, 640x470px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 640x470px

>>54385375
>This is what pathfaggots ACTUALLY BELIEVE

>>54385375
>"If I don't have to look everything up then it's a bad game"
Weird. My opinion has always been, if the game provides a solid framework for play and then from there can simply utilize the GM's common sense for special case situations, then there's no good reason to have to flip pages in a rulebook to find it.

Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.

>>54385423
Ok, I'm not entirely sure, but I hope you know that what you're describing is an awful situation that seriously needs fixing right?

>>54386911
Why would it needs fixing? Nobody who has been playing 3.PF for long enough to know what they're doing never picks martials anyways (barring campaigns where T3/T4 classes are the only ones allowed).

>>54386938
Because it's a high fantasy game in which swinging a sword isn't fun, were the mainstay of the genre is treated as a sidenote, rather than the focus

>>54386671
And it's just apparently for a random npc that the pcs will mostly forget, except if the DM turns it into a dmpc... That's also really bad, it doesn't really bring what she really knows, and it also says that she doesn't want to talk about her past... 2/3 of the bio is for information useless for the players and that they might never even try to find, while several sections are "Oh hey, she know a lot of stuff about the surrounding, improvise that", dear god that's such bad writting... I imagine that for a cthulhu game : the investigators need to talk to a psychanalyst who worked on the case of a mad man on the run. What do you have in the bio ? "Dr Smith did Harvard and he was pretty good. Later, he worked in ... He traveled in Russia, a country he loves : secretly he has communist beliefs.... blah blah blah" and what does he know about Mr O'neil ? "Oh, he knows the case really well, improvise this part"

>>54386938
In that case it'd be better to play a game that cut the martials out entirely and spent all its focus on the casters.

>>54386850
Honestly though, unless you actually build for it and play in an optimization game where things are constantly compared, the issues of caster supremacy and class imbalances actually rarely manifest in games. It's a real thing, yes, but it's not nearly as much of a problem as some people seem to think, and if people actually roleplay, it's even less of an issue, because you bet your ass that the Wizard isn't going to go back and retrain his spells and rest for 8 hours just so he can outclass you, and nine times out of ten, the Wizard isn't actually going to go full Tenser's Transformation on things just to show off.

File: unique_just_because_you_are_unique_does_not_mean_you_are_useful[1].jpg (142KB, 795x596px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 795x596px

>>54386978
All of Paizos SJW shit is just like it, too. It's more important for Paizo to establish how special this snowflake is than that it's actually, y'know, useful in any way.

>>54386973
Martials haven't been Conan since the Thief class was a thing.
>>54387007
>Implying that isn't what's already happening.
Even in martial focused supplements, the bulk of its pages are dedicated to magic.

>>54386610
>>54386592
>>54386562
>>54386559
You can craft as a martial.
You don't even know the game you are supposed to criticise.
Just end it now, is embarrassing. especially the Monk blunder, is a core rulebook feature.
The game IS complicated, but for you any game is. You people are just retarded.

>>54387071
Nobody allows the create your own magic item rules, they allow you to create the preexisting ones. If peole allowed them I would have a long time a go a magic item that only works for my class, only for myself, etc with those juicy bonuses and that allows me to cast true strike as swift action 5 times a day

>>54386978
Paizo's fluff is even more terribly put together than their crunch

It honestly leaves me amazed that they've lasted for so long and still have no fucking idea how their own game works or how designing adventures or NPCs should function

Because like with 3.5 it's a whole lot of minutiae just for simple actions. Not to mention how the game has shifted from actually playing it to some wacky metagame where you use the chunkiest point-buy system ever to plan a character build from 1-20 like it was goddamn Diablo. At that point, why not actually use a point-buy system? You'll save yourself the headache of rifling through feats to find the perfect synergies because the effects are already baked in.

>>54385600
Third edition players don't even remember how when that edition was coming out people were decrying it and saying how *that* wasn't D&D.

>>54383527
Because the shill budget wore off.

>>54387071
The only thing more bonkers in Paizo's rules than the "create your own magic item" rules are the "create your own race" rules, and even then only by a tiny margin

That said, I haven't seen "create your own class" rules and don't know if they exist, but if they do, I'm certain they're even worse, considering that class design has always been where Paizo truly fails

>>54387052
I can cope with sjw character and shit, but seriously, they are making a GAME, not a fetish fan-fiction tier masturbatory material that is just completely useless... It's not even mentionned why she should befriend/stay with the pc's when they escape...

Will take an example in a published Cthulhu book : there is a gay pre-gen character (an actor). Why did they make him gay ? Well he is "officially" involved with another player (an actress), but his lover is a "gray" npc in the scenario that can turn evil, and another player is a journalist under cover that might like this kind of scoop. Tension, roleplay opportunities (trying to hide it, moral decision with the eventual evil npc, fun "false couple" interaction and stuff...), it doesn't feel forced down your throat as a bad fetish writting...

>>54387217
The thing about high level optimization is that it's a more fun and engaging game than actually playing Pathfinder is

>>54387071
>You can craft as a martial.
????
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/item-creation-feats/
>Most item creation feats require you to have caster levels of a certain level to take.
>The ones that don't require you to have ranks in skills that aren't on most martial's class lists.
Am I missing something here?

>>54387198
Here's how designing NPCs should function in d20.

>"Monster has +40 HP because fuck you that's why."
>"Monster has +5 to hit with rapiers because fuck you that's why."
>"Monster is proficient with all weapons because fuck you that's why."
>"Monster can use great cleave because fuck you that's why."
>"Monster has +3 to reflexes because fuck you that's why."
>"Monster prepares and casts spells as a Lv5 druid with the assassin spell list because fuck you that's why."
>"Monster is a Lv5 wizard with d10 hitdie because fuck you that's why."

d20 Edition monster design becomes far, far easier when you add "Because fuck you that's why" bonuses straight to its statblock. This is just common sense but nobody does it.

>>54387168
That's what leds me to believe is that anon the one who doesn't play the game, because he gives you all these magic items, and class features (from other classes) as examples as if everybody plays in groups with those classes and as if everybody is going to get their desired magic items everytime.

On top he recommends crafting magic item feats for a monk (they would need master craftman and craft magic whatever feat, so at the very least 2 feats) when most martials don't have many feat slots avaliable

>>54387252
The class bonus only gives a +3 bonus.

>>54387252
master craftman feat, you still need the craft whatever item feats on top though

>>54387252
There's feat that lets you forego casting ability. Still, it's better and easier as a wizard.

>>54383613
This. They ignore feedback that doesn't fit the narrative they've built for themselves, they ban people who disagree, and they deny caster supremacy even exists. They run their official forums like an authoritarian dictatorship and un-person anyone who points out even obvious flaws.

File: 1491268908686.png (164KB, 409x325px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 409x325px

>>54383613
To add to this, they're the types of people who absolutely positively cannot admit they've ever made any mistakes about anything, ever. It's fucking baffling, especially compared to WOTC's attitude with 5e -- just look at their revised ranger for an example.

Meanwhile, Paizo see themselves as infallible game design supermen who can do no wrong and whose every ruling is inscribed in stone and handed down from god on a mountaintop. Everything is working as intended, there are no loopholes that need plugging, there are no exploits that need fixing, nothing is wrong, and how dare you insult them by suggesting otherwise.

Meanwhile, WOTC was like "Yeah we fucked up the ranger super bad, here's a decent fix. Also, please fill out our surprisingly extensive feedback survey."

>>54387380
Wait... Paizo is... Blizzard ?!

>>54387299
Dubs of truth. Removing skills, feats, and spell-likes from monsters (along with everything else) was the smartest thing 4e did. You look at the monster, and you have all the info you need right fucking there.

>>54387380
You make a good point, but at the same time, in their first and thusfar only PHB rrata, they NERFED the Wot4E monk, which was the single weakest archetype in the entire game, easily worse than any ranger archetype

>>54387464
>monk still sucks
>gets nerfed anyway
Some habits die hard, I guess.

>>54385715
no, 4e is shit.

They took all the cool stuff from 3.PF and made it garbage so that it'd all play on the same level.

Most of the wizard spells of the same name are complete and utter trash compared to their former incarnations. I was playing last week and we almost lost because I thought sleep was an instant-down instead of 'hurr they might fall over at the end of their turn if you happen to hit them.' I cast it on this big ol' cluster of minions and there were way too many dice rolls going on for a single spell.

Also, compare fireball 4e to any other edition's fireball. Even 5e's is better. It does almost 3x as much damage, and it sets things on fire and hits around corners! And this is keeping in mind that you can cast multiple fireballs in a day in 5e!

>>54387464
>You make a good point, but at the same time, in their first and thusfar only PHB rrata, they NERFED the Wot4E monk, which was the single weakest archetype in the entire game, easily worse than any ranger archetype
Let's be honest here, does anyone really play Monks? Does anyone honestly feel that slighted by the Monk sucking dick?

I mean, if people wanted an awesome Monk class, they'd be playing 4e.

>>54387464
I get why they did it, but yeah they fucked up there. WotE needs a total rework, but since it's just a subclass I doubt they're going to make the same huge amount of effort.

>>54387494
>Most of the wizard spells of the same name are complete and utter trash compared to their former incarnations

...But that's a good thing

>>54387494
I have a question, if someone played MTG without the keywords, would you laugh at them? I would, and I don't even play MTG.

Same thing with 4e; keywords on skills can turn entire battles

>>54387515
I play Monks and I like 5e Monks, even if I think they could get a couple more options. It's just WotE that sucks hard.

>>54387494
You're bitching that spells don't auto-win battles. That's the worst possible complaint to make.

>>54387329
yeah because to cast magic items you need spells and other stuff, if you don't have the requirements you add +5 to the CD for any requirement you don't meet, as a martial your CDs are goign to be pretty high unless optimization...but you're already optimizating for attack, and maneuvers and now crafting? you're going to suck in every front

>>54385708
No, Basic and 2e are both outdated piles of shit.

>>54387547
They should have d10 hit die and either ways to increase their damage, or just better damage overall

>>54387515
I honestly see no reason for monk to exist. The whole martial arts and extra damage with unarmed and such should be handled with feats. A straight-up Monk should just be a Fighter that chooses to dedicate themselves to that route.

That way, you could play other things as a type of pugilist character, too, but if you want to play, like, a Bloodrager pugilist in Pathfinder, you have to ask the DM if he'll allow you to just get an extensive class feature essentially for free, which sorta shits on the Monk.

>>54387515
1. I do and I know people who does
2. Not an point, not even an argument

>>54387494
It's just a way more balanced game made for tactical fights

>>54387577
Hehehehehahahahahahaha
Let me tell you a funny story
Lets go back 3 years ago, at the end of 5e playtests, when monk started with d6 damage and at 11th level added 1d8 per minute if they spended ki

Well, devs said after ALPHA that even with that, monks were going to get 1d10 HPs, more damage and more ki because they sucked in the playtests and ALPHA. Now...lets look at the monk in the current PHB, see anything? none of what's promissed in fact they got their damage nerfed

>>54387572
I've recently played 2nd edition (GM was "hurr durr, I only have 2nd edition printed book, I'll not use any pdf"), it just feels so clunky, a bit like when you play an old videogame where many obvious features are not here...

>>54387595
Well, there are other key things to the monk

In 3.5 and PF, it's the flurry, being able to do more attacks than anyone else, except it means that a frail class must remain practically immobile and that is debilitating and also just doesn't do enough damage

In 4e, it's the mobility, no other class in 4e can match the monk for movement options, the swordmage and warlock come close with their wide array of teleports, but the monk will always have more movement options available

>>54387638
That's pretty much it. 2e leaves a lot up in the air on purpose and it's not very well laid out at all.

>>54387595
Monk is older than ranger, warlock, sorcerer, and other classes in D&D. They have more reason to exist than those to be honest.

D&D is not a European fantasy setting and never was, your preconceptions are wrong here.

>>54387534
What?


>>54387533
>>54387564
No, I'm complaining that half the spells on the wizard list are trap options. The saving throws change did enough to nerf wizard spells, but Sleep and Fireball are unneccessarily terrible for daily spells. I get 3d6 damage in a burst, meanwhile the party ranger gets to shoot every target on the fucking map.


>>54387601
I guess? Playing a wizard feels like shit, when the party X is like, "Hey, I'm going to do this thing that's pretty much 900% better than all your things. Have fun!"

>>54387715

While I've always personally seen D&D as closer to Thundaar then Lord of the Rings the people that want a vaguely Tolkien inspired pastiche seem to constitute a sizable majority.

>>54387737
You say that all 4e spells are the same because they do the same damage. Are Thousand-Eyes Idol and Relinquished the same card in YuGiOh because they both have 0 attack and 0 defense?

>>54387797
Doesn't matter what people wants, D&D settings have monk monastiries for centuries, is not "le asian stranger" anymore, a monk in D&D is as strange as a calculator nowadays (another stuff that came from Asia).

I'm so tired of "monks don't fit" argument.

>>54387618
So what are all the NEXT differences? I know that ki used to be on a long rest instead of short, which holy shit good thing they changed that.

>>54387737
Sleep is one of the best level 1 daily control powers in the entire game, the only thing that beats it is the Invoker's "Silent Malediction" and that dazes the user

Fireball, granted, sucks

>>54387849
I'm equally as tired of the 'psionics doesn't fit' argument but in the local groups I couldn't bring up either monks or psions without getting bitched at.

>>54387299
Literally only 3.x uses "monsters as class" monster design. Every other D&D does it as you described.

5e says you can do it, but it lies into your face.

>>54387862
Ki was per day, yes, but had very few uses depending on the tradition and were mostly spell like abilities like reduce all damage from a source to 0, cast fireball, etc, even without ki you were acceptable. Ki now is in almost every monk feature even silly ones, and without ki you're shit now.

>>54387737
the mage in D&D4 shines more in controlling the battlefield than doing damages

>>54387798
I don't play yu-gi-oh.

Also, sleep doesn't do damage. It slows things at minimum and puts things to sleep otherwise.

>>54387900
Requiring a hit and then a failed saving throw is really ass. It has an extremely high potential to do absolutely nothing.

>>54387963
2e doesn't, monster HP and THAC0 is derived from its hitdie, and in 4e, you can accurately estimate damage, HP, accuracy, and defenses just by knowing a monster's level.

>>54387999
Yes, but you can determine the hit-die/level for both AFTER you made it if you really want.

That you can go by hit-die/level to try to stat out a level appropriate challenge thing is a nice side-effect. MM3 on a business card is a guideline, not hard rules.

The main point is, that no other edition requires the existence of things like 10 different types of monster-only versions of toughness to justify a red dragon having 350 hp (numbers chosen arbitrarily).

>>54387299
I prefer that monsters have rules to make things fair and balanced, the "Monster is immune to PCs because fuck you that's why" doesn't sound like very fair for players, been in games like that, no fun at all.

>>54387996
It hits a gigantic area and slows (save ends) even on a miss, which makes it a very reliable soft-control spell, that isn't "nothing"

>>54388074
He's talking about how 3.x had to justify everything the monster had as a mechanic. Most monsters in every D&D have a reason behind everything they do, but those reasons are for flavor or balance: you can build your monster however you want as long as you make it fun or interesting. That's a core part of Monster Design in D&D, where everything is weird and based from myths and stories where monsters could do things because they could do things.

3.PF is like Top Gear

Ambitious but rubbish

>>54388151
I bet he thinks 3.5 Web spell is also nothing, I made GMs rage with that nothing

>>54383798
Why would the images in the core rulebooks affect the thumbnails chosen for their respective general threads on /tg/? (Which as I remember, was literally screencapped over the course of three weeks of generals for this exact argument)

The argument isn't against the systems themselves, but how they are represented by their playerbases.

Pathfinder, for whatever reason, attracts more weebs and waifufags, this is objectively true.

>>54388151
burst 2 is not a gigantic area.

>slow is a good form of control

It's really not. You have to combine it with something else(like difficult terrain or 'at the beginning/end of your turn' effects) to make it really useful.

>>54388185
no, web was pretty good. There were just better spells to take, IIRC.

>>54388378
burst 2 range 20 is pretty great, 16 total squares should, in most fights, catch the majority of your opponents if used early, unless it's an ambush situation and the party started surrounded, and I think you're underestimating how debilitating having your speed reduced to 2 can be, sure it's pretty useless if you've already got your party in melee range, but that's not when you should be casting sleep

>>54383806
/tg/ LOVED Pathfinder! But only because they hated 4e so much, and PF was just a continuation of a system they were already familiar with.

>>54388422
isn't burst 2 25 squares?

1 in the middle and 2 in every direction is 5x5.

>>54388378
>You have to combine it with something else(like difficult terrain or 'at the beginning/end of your turn' effects) to make it really useful.

Well then, it helps that the wizard is also loaded full of those.

>>54388481
oh yes, so it is, sorry

Point remains though

>>54388456
pf is the ex-girlfriend that /tg/ loved until they found a new one that looked the same but wasnt batshit crazy

>>54383527
>trying to pretend anyone takes the trolls seriously

Nice joke.

>>54385375
This has changed a little since the last time you posted it. Never let it be said that PFfags aren't hard workers.

>>54386614
Exploding dungeons!

>>54383527
Paid shills by WotC

Literally

>>54390424
why would WotC waste that much money on something that isn't Magic?

>>54386009
It will take years before people feel like getting rid of generals. Blame quests. Without the massive spew of them from the other boards, WoD fags would not have solidified to be able to stay afloat and then wh40k would have not followed their lead.

Anyone know anything about trailblzaer?

File: The Alexandrian.png (39KB, 592x532px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 592x532px

>>54386563

>>54387494
4E's Fireball is way better than 3.5's because there's shitloads of support for blasters in 4E that has no equivalent in 3.5. The spell itself might be worse on its own, but unless you're going straight to ultrabroken town with stuff like Incantatrix's free metamagic, nothing in 3.5 really touches the constant free bonuses that let you do stuff like add STR to your spell damage or ignore all fire resistance. And that's just scratching the surface with feats. You've got more feats, Paragon Paths, and Epic Destinies that can further jack up your fire damage and give you fire-related utility.

>>54390872
The problem with fireball in 4e is another spell

Fire Burst, a level 7 encounter that is burst 2 instead of burst 3, and deals 1d6 less damage, easy trade-offs considering that you can use it on average 4 times more often than fireball, specially when the enlarge spell feat exists

>>54391188
One is a daily, the other is an encounter.

There's no tradeoff. They don't conflict. It's not like 3.5 or 5e where the spells are fighting for slots.

And enlarge spell also reduces the damage further by -2 per dice.

>>54383527
>now
HHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!
We've hated this shit since Core. Heck, to this day Core Only is still the most imbalanced way to play the game

>>54387494
>waaaaah! Casters are no longer broken!
t. Paidrone

>>54390864
This is so cute
>4e removes "solve every situation instantly" wizards
>4e makes everyone good with 2-3 skills of their own area, guaranteeing that everyone can contribute something, but minimizing the overlap
>4e makes traps more meaningful by handling them as encounters of their own
>4e puts a daily hard limit on healing (as well as an in-combat one)
>WAAAAAH OVERBALANCED BULLSHIT, CAN'T EVEN RUN MYSTERIES AND DUNGEON CRAWLS! 4E IS COMBAT ONLY MINIATURES WARGAME, BECAUSE KIDS THESE DAYS ONLY PLAY COMBAT!

>>54391249
my point is, why take the daily when you could have the encounter variant that's almost as good? It's not like level 5 is a blank spot for wizards, summon magma beast is powerful, and scattering shock is a fantastic mix of control and damage thanks to the large burst letting you clump everyone together for a nice focus-fire from any other AoE attackers you have without frying your allies like fireball does

>>54391363
The site as a whole focuses on 3e, which it's bashing more than 4e.
The complaint about dungeon crawling goes back to 2e (1989).

>>54391395
You can take BOTH. For MAXIMUM FIREPOWER.
Because you fight everything with fire.

>>54391343
it's more like
>waaah everyone is doing everything better than wizards in particular who feel really shitty to play in this one specific edition of D&D that nobody likes!

>>54391395
there are many dailies that are way better than fireball. They could've at least had it do ongoing fire damage, implying it literally set the targets on fire.

You get glitterdust, bigby's icy grasp, stinking cloud, scattering shock, hell, even Web at that level. Fireball is easily ignored.

>>54391650
Except Wizards are one of the best classes in the game. Stop.

>>54391650
>this one specific edition of D&D that nobody likes!
The contents of this thread seem to disagree with you on that front. Also, I prefer Wizards being shit at combat after too many years of martials being marginalized in their own field of specialization.

I'm sorry you aren't allowed to play Super Control God Wizard any more.

Also, your argument aboutFireball being ignorable is kinda of pointless, since even in 3.PF, Fireball tended to be useless after a point due to everything being immune or resistant to Fire damage, and the only way to keep it useful at later levels is if you had made an Admixture Wizard who could spontaneously convert Fireball to other energy types, then abused Metamagicing the fuck out of it

>>54391714
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UjXi1HKjms

>>54391472
You mean trolls. Not this site, trolls trying to get (you)'s.

4e doesn't get less trolls focusing on because it's better, it gets less trolls focusing on it because it's less popular.

Only 5e is more popular than 3e, and that only gets light bashing because the trolls have a hard time gathering complaints that don't sound like they're grasping for straws.

>>54383783
Dafuq is going on at UoI?

>>54383527
Paizo is full of retards. They pointlessly politicize their alignment system and cater to the worst parts of their forum. Golarion is also a shitshow of a setting, and there are too many fucking classes with too many fucking archetypes. Making a stupidly overpowered character that is good at everything and the best at two things is simple.

>>54391765
the site the article was posted on you unrepenting brick

>>54388730
Hi Paizo.
Just for the record, no one here uses the word "troll" anymore.

>>54391650
>Fireball is easily ignored.
Which is a problem why? You take Fireball if you want raw AoE fire damage and nothing else. It's a bad general daily but it's perfectly fine for fire-centric blasters, which are a HELL of a lot better than their 3.5 equivalent.

>>54387464
>>54387469
I have a solution: Stop playing monks. They've always been trash no matter the edition.

>>54387638
Funny, because in my experience 2e is the least clunky and most streamlined game I've ever played.
Maybe your GM is just retarded?

>>54383527
>No quality control on the lower end resulted in a glut of absolute garbage options that serve no purpose other than to waste my time and confuse the newbies.
>devs explicitly don't believe in balance, just from preventing broken options from being published, and it shows.
>devs don't think versatility is important, so martials can only stand still and full attack.
>too many goddamn prerequisites.
>dming is a mountain of work if you're not running from a book

Its a fun game.
But it has some real problems, too.

And that's the game.

Other people don't like their constant political preaching, or how /tg/s pfg is just a cesspool of Furfaggotry and waifuposting.

Literally just play B/X and/or the retroclone of you choice.

Why do weebs love pathfinder so much? I don't play any rpgs.

>>54393545
>Devs don't believe in balance
Is there a screencap or sauce for that? It sounds hilarious to read.

>>54395779
I had it on my old phone.

One of the main devs stated, on the paizo forum, that:
1. Paizo didn't have time to playtest everything they put out, playtesting and balancing is the responsibility of the writer they hired who is being paid less per word than a shitty magazine columnist. Effectively saying they take no responsibility for the quality of the mechanics they publish.
2. In another post, a main dev (may have been the same one) stated that the only balance considerations that matter are preventing overpowered options from coming out, and that underpowered options are fine, and you can take them "for flavor reasons" or some such bullshit.

>>54395779
>>54396204
This policy and attitude that "there's no such thing as too weak, because people just wont take them" is why shitty classes never get anything to improve them, and why if there's a mechanic or ability to do something, even if it's so garbage as to be unusable, they never improve it through errata or publish a more usable replacement.

>>54385573
>Hundreds of unique weapons
Lol

File: 1402481439764.png (101KB, 1051x396px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1051x396px

>>54395779
Literally the first one I found with a little googlefu

>>54383749
like 5th is just 4th reskined to look like 3,5 LOL

>>54383527

Because it got hijacked by cancerous weebs.

>>54383749
That "reskinning to look like 3.x" brings back alot of what 4e lacked that prevented it from being able to run classic d&d settings with any degree of acceptability.

>>54397295
Not the one I had in mind, but it points to their general outlook anyways.

>>54397694
But 4e worked magnificently with the good D&D official settings

I mean, sure, it couldn't really work with Forgotten Realms, but Forgotten Realms was always pretty much the worst official D&D setting

>>54392733
They were crazy in BECMI.

>>54398755
It's crap for forgotten realms, it's crap for planescape, and it's crap for spelljammer.

As those are the d&d settings I mostly enjoy (eberron is okay) 4e was crap for doing any d&d I would really be interested in.

Inb4
>but muh high level npcs!
It's a high powered setting. That's the point. Level 5 characters shouldn't be saving the world. That's what level 15 and 17 characters do. Level 5 characters are getting in over their heads in local faction conflict.

>>54391650
Part of the reason fireball isn't as great is that they decided that a Wizard might actually need to rely on their party for a change, instead of being great at damage and great at utility and great at crowd control and great at everything ever.

>>54399426
But anon, wizards are SUPPOSED to be the best at anything, they just need time to prepare.

>>54400140
A level 1 Wizard in 4e can do exactly that. A mere 29 levels worth of time and research and he'll be doing far more damage than any measly level 1 ranger.

Until then though, they might have to deal with having the time to learn the perfect spell for every situation.

>>54383527
Now? They've been hating on it since day one, dipshit.

>>54388456
I suppose that makes sense.

>>54399268
It never had a real Spelljammer release, but I think it handles the setting pretty well, and Planescape doesn't really work with any D&D system, it sort of needs it's own system that it's never really received

File: have some of that.png (48KB, 855x254px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 855x254px

>>54395779
Have some of that.

>>54401201
Agree. I feel like a 4e game should be tonally clearly different, always a bit gonzo and cape-ish. Like fantasy Doom Patrol or whatever. XCrawl which was originally made for 3.5 makes a lot of sense in 4e. And some of the original 4e fluff is also pretty great.

But I still wouldn't run a Dark Sun game in it.

>>54401260
You should try, it handles DS pretty well.

File: martials suck kiss bye.png (109KB, 1052x390px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1052x390px

>>54395779

>>54399268
>It's a high powered setting. That's the point. Level 5 characters shouldn't be saving the world. That's what level 15 and 17 characters do. Level 5 characters are getting in over their heads in local faction conflict.

You just described the heroic/paragon/epic split 4e is using.

>>54386203
>It was more transparent too. While I'm sure 3.x and PF fans took a while to figure out how to master the system ("Why aren't you charging?" is one I remember hearing a lot), it was visible in 4E from the start.

This actually explains one of the issues I had with 4e but could never put into words. Chaos bolt was always the optimal choice for my sorcerer and every time I gained a new spell/power/whatever it was just filling up more hotbar slots that I'd never have reason to use.

>>54401657
Was that some essentials sorcerer?

Encounters > at wills 9 time out of 10. I have no idea how chaos bolt could outperform flame spiral, for instance.

>>54401657

Which cruddy encounters/dailies did you have that chaos bolt outdid it?

>>54401716
>>54401747
It's been forever since I played the character (or 4e in general), so I can't very well answer that. Only report my discontent with the scenario.

>>54401790
Also it was not anything out of Essentials unless the character builder really fucked up.

I play Pathfinder all the time and don't encounter any SJW stuff at all. Could someone please explain this to me?

May just be because my DM home-brews most of his shit, though.

>>54401790
It's just that it seems very unlikely. Chaosbolt isn't even that good of an at-will compared to, say, Dragonfrost. Unless you intentionally built your character to be absolutely super-focused on it (somehow... does it even have much support?) and only took super shitty encounters/dailies, I can't see how it's possible that it was the best choice you had to such a degree that you did basically nothing else.

I guess I'll stop tiptoeing around and just say that it reflects on you much worse than on the game if you valued chaos bolt over every single encounter/daily the sorc has, even at level 1.

>>54401958
Paizo itself has gone progressively more SJW as time went on, just have a look at any of their newer stuff to see what I mean.

>>54401657
There's two (sort of) building philosophies when it comes to picking powers in 4e: picking the power that does what you already do but better, or picking the power that gives you something you cannot already do.

So if Chaos Bolt was always the optimal choice for you in combat, you either never picked the power(s) that was Chaos Bolt+ (most classes had some generic improved version of their At-Wills), or you never saw a reason to use your alternate options which could have been anything from crowd control, emergency defenses, mobility, etc.

Generally speaking though, your At-Will is never always optimal unless you invested significant resources into building your combat style around it.

File: tmp_8599-1465942884862-891764816.jpg (92KB, 894x894px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 894x894px

>>54402010
>player has a bad time with my favorite system
>blame player

See, I think this is why no one likes 4e evangelists, because it always comes down to these sorts of personal attacks. I'll also add that it's funny how 4e supposedly never has any trap options/builds, but when it does it's because the players are too stupid to make the "right" decisions.

>>54402105
Thank you for providing worthwhile context and speculation. It has been too long for me to puzzle out what exactly went wrong, but I appreciate the attempted help.

File: 960.jpg (53KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 960x540px

>>54402157
In this context I think it is justified.

He is basically being pic related.

File: fucking 4e.jpg (92KB, 494x671px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 494x671px

>>54402157
>>54401790

>cast a spell?
>nah bro Im good, just gonna stab it with my dagger
>man these spellcasters are shit
>orrrr. or something, i dont remember lol

In all honesty 4e did suffer from some power creep, not always linearly though (sometimes the best power was still a straight PHB1 power that never lost its solid value). But 4e had a really low bar for 'being competent'.

In 4e, you can build a Human Fighter straight from PHB1 only and keep trucking all the way from 1-30, being a respectable member of the team. Will you be solo'ing every encounter like the Charop board builds do? No. But you'll pull your weight. To make a "wrong" decision you either have to deliberately and obviously build yourself into the ground (Rogue with 12 Dex or something) or you have to ignore half your abilities for MBAing the closest thing every turn.

As opposed to 3.PF, where you need a billion splatbooks and obscure snowflake feats just to make a martial that kinda keeps up if the caster's player is hungover that day.

>>54402157
But it's not even possible, even at level 1 the encounter powers a sorcerer can pick all have either strictly superior damage or have some other debuffing effect that makes them worth using over chaos bolt, it's not possible to make a sorcerer who's best option is to always use chaos bolt unless the player behind said character either doesn't understand or doesn't care enough to use other options

>>54401334
And in forgotten realms the rest of the world is on the same scale as the PCs.

>>54383527
Because 5e does exactly what Pathfinder should have done

It's fundamentally 3.5, but with the biggest problems fixed

And because of this comparison, all the massive flaws with Pathfinder are now starkly visible

File: 8nxPAie.jpg (178KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1680x1050px

>>54387658
>In 3.5 and PF, it's the flurry, being able to do more attacks than anyone else, except it means that a frail class must remain practically immobile and that is debilitating and also just doesn't do enough damage
>In 4e, it's the mobility, no other class in 4e can match the monk for movement options, the swordmage and warlock come close with their wide array of teleports, but the monk will always have more movement options available
None of that has to be a part of a single class, though - you should be able to build a rogueish monk or a fighterish monk. The monk doesn't really *add* anything relevant in itself that has to be policed or restricted in some capacity. Also, 4e was shit anyway.

>>54387715
>Monk is older than ranger, warlock, sorcerer, and other classes in D&D. They have more reason to exist than those to be honest.
Age has absolutely nothing to do with this. Also, Rangers have several unique mechanics that would be hard to generalize, but it's entirely debatable whether that shouldn't just be folded in under Nature-ish Fighters and Martial Druids. I don't have the mechanics of the Warlock fresh in my head anymore, but thematically, it's largely a martial sorcerer. But those are different discussions entirely - I was only talking about Monk. There are, perhaps, others that should have the same treatment.

>D&D is not a European fantasy setting and never was, your preconceptions are wrong here.
Completely irrelevant and also an unfounded strawman. You were the one pulling traditions and preconceptions and age into this. To me, what kind of setting you play in is irrelevant. I never suggested that D&D was a European fantasy setting (even though it absolutely was) because either way, it's completely beside the point.

>>54402010
>Chaosbolt isn't even that good of an at-will compared to, say, Dragonfrost.
But I want to be a dark wizard, not an elemental frost wizard desu. This is just optimization faggotry uguu~.

4e only seems to attract people that should be playing board games like Descent to begin with. It's a great board game, but people shouldn't pretend that it's a roleplaying game.

>>54383527

People saw its flaws - original and the ones that crept in later. Also, I think at some point it just became the default D&D-esque setting and thus the designated target to hate. A lot of people were also in love with some 3PPs and wanted to bash Paizo in comparison.

Though I still see a lot of PF games online, including referenced here. Personally, I prefer PF to 5E, 5E is not a bad system in and of itself, but just feels kinda bland to me.

>>54401958
>May just be because my DM home-brews most of his shit, though.
All the SJW shit is obviously in the flavour texts and setting material. If you somehow completely ignore that, you obviously won't notice, but a lot of nuance is also lost.

>>54402663
The point wasn't "Don't choose chaos bolt because dragonfrost is better", it was "chaos bolt isn't some god-tier power that's better than all other options"

>>54402663
>But I want to be a dark wizard, not an elemental frost wizard desu. This is just optimization faggotry uguu~.

Then play a warlock? The scholarly guys with dark powers?

>>54402642

>None of that has to be a part of a single class, though - you should be able to build a rogueish monk or a fighterish monk.

You...can. There is an entire archetype of them for people who want to multiclass fighter and wreck shit with it and the base monk is very good at rogue stuff.

>>54392767
GM being retarded about the rules is an eventuality. Only played 2nd edition with him and not for many sessions, that was just my feeling

>>54402642
>None of that has to be a part of a single class, though - you should be able to build a rogueish monk or a fighterish monk. The monk doesn't really *add* anything relevant in itself that has to be policed or restricted in some capacity. Also, 4e was shit anyway.

4e Monk is actually great for doing rogue-ish stuff, being a DEX primary class. And one of the best ways to build it is multiclassing rogue.

If you just want the "punchy" part of monk, you can mutliclass it with anything; brawler fighter and TWF rangers make really good "not weeaboo" pugilists, for example with the monk multiclass.

>>54387595

Doesn't that apply to most classes?

>Why should monk be a class? Why not a fighter who focuses on dex?
>Why should paladin be a class? Why not a fighter who's religious
>Why should ranger be a class? Why not a fighter with a bow?
>Why should barbarian be a class? Why not just a really angry fighter?

>>54403161
Exactly. That's why classless systems are the best.

>>54402674
We do his own custom adventures and settings, so we don't really encounter much actual Pathfinder stuff. We even do Forgotten Realms shit with the Pathfinder ruleset.

>>54403161

5e almost had that. FIghter, Cleric, Wizard, and Rogue would have been the only "classes" and everything else would have been done through archetypes.

I was hype for it, but it didn't work out in playtesting so it was dropped very early on.

>>54403161
>>54403684
Shadow of the Demonlord actually went through with it.

>>54403684
5e seems to have lost a lot of good ideas in playtest. Sorc & fghter especially.

>>54403791
That's what happens when you build your surveys around asking what 'feels like D&D'.

>>54403759
SotD is a really good way of doing classes / careers.

>>54403973
Well yeah, because "feels like D&D" doesn't actually mean "feels like D&D", it means "feels like 3.5"

This is how you get d8 hit die on monks, sorcerers that are just wizards but worse, and fighters who can't really do anything interesting beyond making simple attacks

>>54402157
Picking Chaos Bolt is not a trap option. Using Chaos Bolt to the exclusion of all else isn't a trap option, it's a player being a fucking retard. It is absolutely your fault if you're spamming a single ability out of your repertoire and then complaining that you're ineffective.

>>54383815
/osrg/ here.

No.

>>54402642
>even though it absolutely was
>Had not mongolian hordes, not native americans, not Hindu mythology and monsters since day 0
>absolutely was European fantasy setting
Not him, but Ok

File: tenor.gif (880KB, 498x268px) Image search: [Google]

880KB, 498x268px

Bloat!!!!
I gave up keep up on the books and just purchased herolab app because trying to find the right rule in all of those books was a waste of time.

The only thing I miss from that system is the monster templates I can add on to other monsters. So I could make a zombie dragon or ooze dwarf or some shit.

If I didn't have players that love that crap I wouldn't have even bothered. In the end I got them into 5e and never looked back... except for those templates... damn I miss those...

>>54405010
Of all of Pathfinders problems, I've never really found this one to be a big deal

After all, PFSRD exists, so all the rules you need are always in one database

>>54404167
>complain chaos bolt ended up being the only worthwhile option
>"damn anon, only an idiot would think chaos bolt was a trap option"

>>54385573
Now, it's been a while since I've played 3.pf, don't you take a huge penalty to your maneuver roll if you get hit by the AoO you provoke for attempting one without the feat?

Also, AC is trash unless you min-max the shit out of it so you're probably going to get hit.

>>54403791

Sorc would have been glorious but there's no way to balance it so it actually works right.

>>54405010

DMG pages 274-283 is a huge help here, especially the charts "Hit Points by Challenge Rating" on 274, "Monster Features" on 280-281, and "NPC Features" on 282.

The main reason being that the 5e system doesn't require a whole template's worth of changing: A Zombie Dragon would just be Dragon + The Zombie NPC features with a Necrotic Breath Weapon/Resistance, and an Ooze Dwarf just might be a dwarf with the Grappler benefit from the Mimic stat block.