Daily Pathfinder hate thread

But it was made by a guy who drew for 3.5! How dare you!

Valeros is generally agreed to be the most competently built of all the iconics, which I'm not sure is intentional or some irony considering Fighter is pretty much the worst class.

Carrying so much bullshit is the murderhobo way.

>TWF samurai

If you also use Weapon Master's handbook, it could work. It's still more investment than what it's worth, but it isn't entirely retarded.

Oh my god this even worse.

>Carrying so much bullshit is the murderhobo way.

Hasn't anyone heard of a fucking backpack?

It's Wayne Reynolds. Overdesigned And Shit is his defined style.

People who complain about D&D on Veeky Forums are like people who go to a Chinese restaurant and then complain about how there's Chinese food on the menu.

>Everything MUST be optimized
You're not a lot of fun to play with are you buddy?

Contrary to what 3.5 players actually believe, traditional games includes wayyyy more than their precious over-bloated system of self-torture. 3.5 is to Veeky Forums what Nintendo is to videogames, something that's fallen out of relevance because it's been replaced with things that are much better, but refuses to die due to a very small pocket of delusion fanboys who refuse to let go because MUH NOSTALGIA.

I think he means that d&d is like duck soup, war games are wontons or whatever the fuck and card games are your blackbean sauce noodles.
It's all chinese food once you get down to it.

People who play 3.PF are people who'd rather eat Digiorno over homemade pizza because they don't feel like learning how to cook and will shit on homemade pizza because they don't want to feel bad about eating ready-made pizza.

In that case, people who complain about Pathfinder are people who go to a restaurant, try one dish, and then whine that the restaurant doesn't serve anything they like without even bothering to try anything else on the menu.

When you get down to it, the answer to every Pathfinder complaint is to play something that isn't Pathfinder, but god forbid you expect Pathfinder players to listen. It's like telling a smoker the only way to stop coughing up blood is to quit smoking, but they keep doing it anyway.

To be honest though... I sorta understand it. Pathfinder is so painful to learn that once you do, you feel invested. You;re scared other systems will take just as many weeks or months to master, only to be just as dissapointing. It's OK, anons... not all systems are as bad as Pathfinder. Some of them you can actually learn and be competent at in a single sitting. I know it's hard to believe, but it's true, it really is. Some systems out there actually let you roleplay, don;t require "system mastery" and actually reject "ivory tower game design".

Chinese food gives me the shits.

>Valeros, iconic fighter, always depicted using two weapon fighting, slick stuff right there - yet the worst type of melee tactics you could choose mechanic-wise.
Yeah, you clearly don't know shit about PF. TWF has the potential for highest damage - it's not great because of all the feats it requires, but it's certainly better than, say, using a one-handed weapon or sword and board without TWF.

OMG how is there always someone to defend this shit.

Every fighting style below bows is shit in Pathfinder, with THF being OK instead of shit.

That does not make TWF the worst melee tactic - in fact, it's the second best, far above shit like using combat maneuvers.

You're basically taking more feats to deal less damage than the guy who focused on 2H weapons.

To be fair, fighting with two weapons is pretty difficult. There's a reason it didn't happen much in real life.

You're ignoring the people who really do want to play something else, but don't know anyone who will play anything other than Pathfinder and don't want to deal with how god-awful Roll20 and practically any PbP game can be.

It's interesting to see this thread crash and burn because people who actually play PF don't care what any of you think.

Just another case of badwrongfun police making the board a shittier place.

>Most of the detail is unnecessary and their carrying so much bullshit that it makes them look cluttered and busy.
That's the one things that is right- PCs tend to carry shitloads of gear.

In backpacks and satchels and containers, not strapped all over their person by loose straps and leather belts.

I mean, one stray fireball and the Fighter in the OP loses most of his gear.

I'm guessing for similar reasons you can't cast fireball in real life as well?

Except it's not so much badwrongfun because the game is:

1) Objectively broken
2) The most popular game on the market

That is a terrifying combination that deserves discussion.

...

It's easier to make a fireball using a canister of gasoline and a match than it is to make TWF actually viable.

If you have to hold something in your off-hand, make it a shield or arming sword so you can protect your flank.

Rifts is also objectively broken and is insanely popular, yet receives no discussion.

4e is objectively broken and that receives outright defensive reactions.

Exalted isn't just objectively broken, it's outright stupidly unplabale, yet that recieves no discussion.

Finally, WoD is so broken it makes PF look reasonable balanced.

So, yeah, you're just upset about people having badwrongfun. Get over yourselves and move on.

>Rifts is insanely popular
What?

>4e is objectively broken
I'm sorry, what?

Well, it's broken in the sense that it cannot be fixed.

>I was only pretending to be retarded!

TWF with a shield you say?
That's just crazy enough to work.
Thanks user.

>>-4 Charsima
never played pf but this revelation was hilarious after reading all the posts building up to it

These two go hand in hand, really.
So many people suffer through learning the ins and outs of 3.PF that even if a few of them want to try something else so many of their friends either don't want to learn something new because they think it's gonna be just as bad or just think that it's not worth their time to learn something new.

4e is objectively broken, not in the same way as PF, but it is.

The reason it didn't happen much in real life is because using a shield was strictly better at keeping you alive, though. I mean, it's fairly difficult, you're right, but only in the sense that you'd have to put in a couple of minutes each day practicing. It's not like it was some kind of ~mysterious advanced technique~ that only masters could use.

>Daily Pathfinder hate thread
You mean /pfg/?

Jesus, man. He makes Tetsuya Nomura's stuff look sleek and elegant.

Nigga. I don't play Pathfinder, or 3.5.

I will never, ever touch either of those systems again.

I complain about them to expose their flaws to people that might not know, to prevent the literal brain damage those fucking shitpiles of system inflict on people. When I was growing up, NOT speaking out against those bloated piles of living cancer lead to their prominence, and retarded idiots that defend caster supermancy so rabidly.

Never fucking again.

I have attempted to run other systems before but at the endd of the day just have to return to 3.pf. its just the way how it is sadly. at least i make the effort to broaden horizons.

Reminder he killed his family with poison and Duergar have native poison immunity by default.

At least you found some people that were willing to try!
I can't tell you how many times I've offered to run something like Dungeon World or Project: Dark or some other far simpler game on;y to be met with responses of "We don't wanna learn a whole new system".

Other responses include "We don't want to play a hack of Bear World, you fuck."

Please, kind noble sir, do don a trip so that your valued service can be noticed and justly rewarded.

You talkin' shit about mad prophet boy?

>Finally, WoD is so broken it makes PF look reasonable balanced.
Chronicles of Darkness is way more balanced.

Mage 2e fixes mages so they're not broken any more.

>I'm inspired by these greasy, homeless, hoarders they show on official art

What's inspiring about that?

At least MtG still has some good art. Everything done by these two, for one. Wings of Orzhova is another great example of their art.

As for Pathfinder, my main problem with the system is that their approach to class imbalance wasn't to reign in the power of spellcasters, but to give every class a boost in some way... including spellcasters. Sure, they got less of a bonus, but do you really need class features every other level AND 9th level spellcasting? Sorcerers didn't need it in 3E and they were Tier 2.

I feel like Pathfinder could have been great, if only it had the balls to make spellcasters on par with mundane fighters and rogues. Make their spell selection way narrower so they can't do a million different things. Change the more powerful utility spells so they're either toned down, more limited in scope, or have serious costs and risks associated with them. Then, when casters start getting the seriously good mojo at mid to high levels, give martial characters abilities that BREAK THE LAWS OF PHYSICS. If a caster can raise the dead and teleport across whole nations, a martial character of the same level should be able to keep fighting at insanely huge massive negative hit points or jump hundreds of feet at a time like the Hulk.

Make low levels gritty realistic fantasy with weak and limited magic, and high levels over-the-top Herculean / Superheroic fantasy with powerful magic. Because, right now, Fighters start gritty and stay that way, and Wizards go from minor tricks to making their own demi-planes and becoming physical gods. High level play should be equally ridiculous and empowering to all classes, not just the dudes in stupid robes.

>defend caster supermancy so rabidly.
rolling my eyes at you fampai

People defend this. You can't even try and say otherwise with a straight face.

Eat shit and die.

You mean in the sense of you have to use specific books where they fixed the monster math and give out a few math-fixing feats for free? Because I'd hardly call that broken.

You might not like 4e, or not think it's true D&D or whatever, but for what it sets out to do, it does.

You realize that's a joke image right? Most of the stuff that is listed for the wizard doesn't work against dragons.

You're clearly acting with pride rather than shame,
so do the world a favor and post with a name.

The class glut is very broken, the fuck you talking about. I just hate D&D m8.

Well to be fair, both of your alternatives there are shit smeared out to look like nuetella so I do not doubt people outright rejecting them.

wtf are you talking about? i've seen nearly all of these things done in pathfinder, and no one's had a problem.

do you have one of those DM's that just wants to shit on everyone's idea?

do your players memorize stats while being waterboarded and beat by their elder role-playing siblings?

i really don't understand this type of mentality?

>sleep
>dragon
>dragon
>humanoid
>save spells/spells in general
>dragon
user this is obviously not serious god damn

Wait, so 4e is broken, because it has a bunch of different classes?

I could get how you could see that as a bad thing, but they're all fairly balanced with eachother, so that wouldn't be 'broken'.

>i really don't understand this type of mentality?
I guess you don't?

>hurr, it's a picture of a dragon
>that must mean they're talking specifically about dragons instead of encounters in general

No, there are particular classes, abilities, and combinations of abilities that break the game.

> but they're all fairly balanced with eachother
Have you not actually played 4e? It suffers from a majority of the same problems as 3.5, simply in a different shade.

Don't diss nintendo like that

Unlike 3.5, Nintendo was good once upon a time

Such as? The main ones got errata'd. Even Frostcheese got an errata.

I played a pathfinder campaign once when i was an unreliable player. i only showed up half the time due to work and life.

>decided to play a dwarf bard with a crossbow.
>decided to have alzheimers. that explained me wandering off and on throughout the campaign.
>I would show up at the most opportune moment, during a fight where people needed an advantage, and they would get that extra +hit or saving throws.
>became a hero.
>later on in end campaign, getting ready to transition to epic campaign.
>party interacts with contract devil.
>party makes a grievious error.
>fortunately, senile dwarf bard was not present for contract
>becomes major plothook. senile dwarven bard saves the party.
>becomes approached by a god of chaos
>become a demi-god.
>become co-DM when i'm there with an npc character.
>campaign is best campaign we ran since we decided to all play chaotic evil orcs and half-orcs.

can't honestly have anything bad to say about pathfinder.

You are on a board that believes their IQ is 70 points above average and that one anecdote they read a while back or bad example is what is at every table.

When told this is not true, they will scream about how they had a bad time, how you are actually having a bad time and they have this amazing thing that can fix your problem.

These few have had the stick for long enough that it is starting swing the other way. People have time to try their alternatives and found them wanting or just something no one wants to play.

You realize half the things it said also don't actually work. Maze is the most "trap in a pocket dimension spell" and lasts at maximum minute per level.

Wizards are worse at dealing damage than martials. They simply are. It's the one thing a competent martial can do better than a competent caster. (yes I can provide numbers to prove what ever build you have wrong).

Instantly tripping anything humanoid hasn't been a thing since 3.5, and even then it can only be done with a VERY liberal reading of the rules.

Solid fog blocks sight for everyone, doesn't help in a lot of encounters.

Wizards are broken, but that picture is a fucking joke you piece of human garbage.

Name some.

i've had a player do a fighter who had a back-up dagger. it actually became very useful when he was able to conceal it during a weapons checkpoint.

i feel like you're just being picky for no reason and looking to bitch about it.

>Have you not actually played 4e?

Extensively. If you think 4e has the same problems as 3.5, I would sooner assume that you can't read.

>yet the worst type of melee tactics you could choose mechanic-wise.

It's like OP never actually played Pathfinder. This is whats wrong with this archaic site: people make shit up then the circle jerk ensues. Dual-wielding is one of the highest Damage-per-turn choices available to fighters if not the highest if used properly.

OP just give up. you are an embarrassment online as much as you are in real life.

>Maze is the most "trap in a pocket dimension spell" and lasts at maximum minute per level.

That's long enough to remove a big dude from a fight entirely. Going up against 1 dude then 1 dude is a lot easier than 2 dudes at once.

Tfw when i realise I love how retarded and shit 3.pf is.

As a opp guy seen plenty of people acknowledge how broken wod and exalted are. Difference is we now have new editions that work.

Maze only lasts that long if the character is stupid. They can escape with an intelligence check. That being said it is also a level 8 wizard spell. No one is arguing that wizards at 15th level are balanced. It also allows for spell resistance, but that does not matter as much.

The dragon in the image could easily escape the maze.

That being said I am commenting that the image is still fucking wrong. It says "forever", which does not exist except at the conjunction of using several spells in order including a fucking permanency'd demi-plane.

i played 4.e once. didn't really want to play it again. no, it didn't have the same problems. it just had all new ones i didn't care to combat. e5 looks more promising desu. and this is coming from a die-hard pathfinder/2.0 dnd fan.

Hey man, I like 4e, but you are straight wrong

Only in terms of Essentials classes though. Amongst, pre-essentials classes they're mostly balanced, balanced enough that there isn't a massive shift in party viability between taking, say, an assassin against taking a ranger. But post essentials you've got shit like vampires, knights, cavaliers and (the one that I've had the worst personal experience with) bladesingers.

>It says "forever", which does not exist except at the conjunction of using several spells in order including a fucking permanency'd demi-plane.

>It doesn't exist except for this way that it does

So...Wizards can do that then? Not saying it's the most effective option, but it's there.

Every part of that story would have been exactly as possible--if not easier--in any other RPG. But they don't require 4+ densely-packed pages of character sheets that still manage to leave things out, or require a flowchart to explain how to grab someone.

5e is nice in that no matter what weapon configuration you have, the damage evens out more or less. It does make things feel a little more flat, but imo the difference in weapons and fighting style mechanics was never that thrilling in any variant of D&D. So to me, all that should more or less be flavour.

(I'm talking melee weaps here, obv there should be a difference between ranged and melee, and some melee weapons like ones with reach)

Doing so takes casting for ~5 hours and spending ~25k GP, and allows for several saves.

Really, at that point it's not a real issue. Is the enemy waits for 5 hours for you to cast then they deserve it.

Bladesingers are the main offenders, and even then that's only if you try to actually build them as controllers instead of strikers.

Even in the case of Essentials classes though, they only taper off at Paragon tier.

I wouldn't exactly call that 'just as broken as 3.5'. Yeah, those classes aren't as good as the pre-essentials ones, but they can still do decently.

It's certainly not the gulf that 3.5 had between 'almost useless' and 'basically god'

>5e is nice in that no matter what weapon configuration you have, the damage evens out more or less.

Well, Great Weapon kicks the shit out of everything else once feats come into play.

I love everything about 3.PF except actually playing the game

It's just so much fun as an optimization exercise. Building a hulking hurler who can lift the known universe, a barbarian who can deal thousands of points of damage on a single charge, a monk that attacks 18 times per turn (and misses every hit because monks are ass), that's fun as hell. But actually using those characters in game? Way less enjoyable

Yeah, but other weapon types have other benefits. Archery is obvious due to range. Sword and Board has the defensive applications. Two-weapon fighting is probably the worst, but mainly on Fighters who already get 4 attacks.

you are not wrong. but this also doesn't prove that pathfinder is any less of a system, and that no one has had fun playing it. the entire premise of OP's thread is bullshit. pathfinder is fun. "people" make it not fun. just like with any other system.

>waaaaaah my unique half-fairy pike-specced rogue made a few bad rolls!

Yeah but you said 'The damage evens out' rather than 'They all have uses' so I decided to be pedantic.

5e honestly annoys me with it's 6 types of save.

Don't forget the anal spelunker build.

Dnd/pathfinder are popular because they are so big that almost no one else tries to do generic fantasy dungeon crawler. They're bad but in many cases also the only option

how the fuck are you guys playing pathfinder? when would you ever need this level of meta-gaming to succeed?

we had one dude who wanted to meta-game and researched which build would make him most effective. he was literally the most useless dude, in both combat and any interaction, because he was so specialized to fight giant bosses that he could never help out in casual encounters.

what the fuck kind of people do you actually play with?

I've never seen a Pathfinder character built in less than three hours, including with experienced players who'll fight tooth and nail for how great Pathfinder is. The second-longest I've seen it take to make a character is 4e, at about a half-hour. Then you've got two choices:
>go through the trouble of memorizing all your dozens of key statistics
or
>consult your character sheet every time you want to do something or every time something is done to or around you
Neither is conducive to getting on with the actual playing.

Yes, it is possible to have fun with Pathfinder, but it is an active impediment to fun. You have fun in spite of it, not because of it.

It also makes casters even more dominant than in any other edition of D&D, so who the fuck cares?