Starfinder

Oh look, it's the eternally triggered "Oh look, it's eternally triggered bitch-user" bitch-user again. What, tired of forcing your old meme? :)

Sunk cost fallacy user, and people needing to validate their opinions.

If you're insecure, you don't like the idea that something you like might not be good, or even the best thing, so you take any arguments made about its quality as personal insults- PFfags get mad because by calling Pathfinder a shitty system they feel personally insulted.

It's fucking stupid. Every system has flaws, and acknowledging and being aware of those flaws, honestly appreciating the system for what it is is a part of really enjoying it, but sadly we have a huge number of people who lack the self awareness to really retain that distance.

> :)

He's using Emoticons now boys, Thats how we know he's serious!

...

Why does Veeky Forums hate Pathfinder and Paizo so much?

Because they rehashed the worst parts of 3.5 and gave it a spit shine. That and the attitudes of the writers when it came to things like nerfing fighters and buffing casters and the logic they employeed doing this as well as shutting down discussion and criticism of their decisions.

the puking idiot dog is the shitposters
the blanket is us

poetry

Is this how Pathfinder threads are?

it's popular

Veeky Forums hates it just like it hates everything.

>See

For me, it's mostly annoyance at the vocal minority of the fanbase with an inability to admit the flaws in their system. I don't hate PF, I might even play it if it was run by a good GM who knew how to make the system not suck, but the fact remains that the system does really fucking suck.

Paizo, meanwhile, are a company with a lot of really shitty policies and their designers can be total stupid dicks. Pic related.

That Facebook post was a joke though

But league is good, dotard

Proof please?

Every bloody time.

I agree that PF has flaws. I just disagree with most people on Veeky Forums as to what those flaws are -- and what other systems contain flaws.

I disagree. I feel like a lot of people who insist it sucks also don't actually play it, and base their results on theorycraft.

But that's just my opinion, and that particular opinion is not popular on Veeky Forums.

Starfinder may be awesome -- at the very least, Paizo is good at fluff (a lot of anti-Paizo people on here disagree with that too). But I have hopes.

These days I find it hard to see the point in League. If I want to play a better, more complex and competitive game (and also hate myself and want to suffer), I'll play DotA. If I want to play a more casual take on the same concept, I'll play Heroes of the Storm instead.

I guess I could kinda see the point in LoL as a middle ground, but the lack of any differentiation from the norm at that point kinda kills it, especially with atypical offerings like Smite out there.

>Paizo is good at fluff
I might agree given the circumstances, but they have since retconned everything that I liked about the setting. So no, Golarion is just a shabbier SJW version of the Forgotten Realms as it stands.

It sounds awful.
Let's just add sci-fi and magic? What could possibly go wrong.

Mobas are all garbage and league is the worst of said garbage.

>"I WAS JUST PRETENDING TO BE RETARDED!"

Theorycraft has value when assessing system mechanics. That a rule can be worked around/tweaked by a GM does not stop it being a bad rule, and the system would still benefit from the rules being better and more fit for purpose.

With PF, the fact that so much of the content is garbage, either gamebreakingly good or hopelessly bad, is one of my biggest issues with it. You need to pick options within a very tight range and ignore a lot of the breadth that is the real advantage of the system to have any hope of a mechanically consistent experience that doesn't require constant work on the GMs part to keep balanced.

Is this going to be like Mass Effect?

>reduced to responding with anime girls and a meaningless shitpost

Looks like I win again, user. TY for playing.

I like the idea of starfinder in so much it does what no other D&D setting has done and actually advanced the setting into a futuristic setting.

I don't want a hard sci-fi setting and I grow tired of the typical tolkien style europenis fantasy bullshit. I want laserguns and swords and weird magic aliens and magitech but apparently a great deal of people are to autistic to simply run with the idea in d20.

desu the op pic looks like Destiny with some anime flair.

paizo.com/threads/rzs2q8e5&page=16?Can-I-fire-my-longbow-six-times-in-a-round-ever#769

The reason the cord was changed was because retrieving a weapon as a swift intention wasn't how the thing was supposed to work. It was errat'd to stop AoOs when picking the weapon up, rather than making picking up the weapon faster.

That doesn't say anything about the prior post being a joke, though?

Why don't you look at his actual Facebook page before you start saying things that make it clear that you don't know what you are talking about. There are plenty of examples of them being incompetent, but a thoroughly debunked Facebook post isn't one of them.

I don't see debunking, I see backpedalling and butt covering, but fair enough.

I'm looking forward to it, my group loves PF and is reluctant to try most other systems(Because even the group retard kinda knows the rules) so even if it's largely a reskin it will be nice to play in something fresh.

Situations like this are possibly another reason why Pathfinder gets so much hate on Veeky Forums.

It's an interesting trend that people who play 3.PF or other D&D variants tend to play a much smaller variety of games than people who play other games.

If people play other RPGs, they generally play a lot of different ones, while if a group plays D&D it's quite common for them to only play D&D or very close variations.

It creates a lot of frustration, with people who embrace the hobby as a whole running into situations where out of the entire breadth of experiences available, people keep going back to the same few heroic fantasy games which mostly aren't even that good.

Again, the intention stated never matched what he said in the post. It is almost like someone who came to the conclusion that the post was serious is seriously misinformed even after multiple statements from the lead designers.

Looks like a decent way to run a mass effect game or another anime/punk space opera.

When it came out all of the 3.5 fags were butthurt that it a new tske rather than just another splat book. The 4e people are a bunch of mongoloids who saw it as their main compitition and treated it like Rome did an antipope. The 5e crowd needs to justify using books that were never finished and a system that fails to function after level 5, so they can't budge from the simple=balanced idea and see people who didn't change to 5e as backwards rednecks.

Don't get me wrong, pathfinder isn't great either. Most of the vocal fans of every rpg are utter cancer, it's no differet. However, again like every other rpg, it can be a lot of fun so long as the dm isn't a cunt.

In our case, we've tried a bunch of other systems; RIFTS, Dark Heresy, FATE, Champions and a few others I can't think of. Half the group is lazy and doesn't care to learn a new system, the one dude I'm pretty sure has a legit learning disorder, so even after explaining a rule or his character sheet for the fifth time running it's easier than educating him on a whole new system.

Don't hang with invalids, kids.

Most people can tell you, and have fond memories of "the first game that showed me there were games that weren't DnD". Usually its shadowrun.
3.pf loyalists just never found that game that taught them that there was more to RPGs than DnD.

btw that game for me was Rifts. What a glorious unplayable mess it is. I love Rifts. and it tolerates me.

>Rifts
there's the problem. the palladium system and infamous palladium book layouts will discourage you from venturing out for awhile.

tell me, did you actually figure out how to play that game? or did it quickly become a jury rigged homebrew?

We got it, the guy running it was apparently an old veteran so he was able to explain the rules pretty concisely.
I personally wasn't a fan of it, too far up its own ass.

3.butthurt players outright deny that there are a dozen other editions of D&D ALL OF WHICH BETTER THAN THEIR FUCKING TRAINWRECK

>I might even play it if it was run by a good GM who knew how to make the system not suck
Like most games, the most important part is to make sure everybody's on the same page and to not be too distracted by the mechanics and finer points moment-to-moment. The issue usually is people over-crunchify things or think calling for more and more dice rolls is how you run a game. The rules themselves become a bit of a trap because so many things are enumerated, and sometimes when you have a hammer every problem looks like a nail.

Here's the advice I gave my younger cousin when he started GMing for his friends: "If it's not fun without math, adding math will only make it worse."
Spend more effort thinking of things in actual narrative terms first, and then throw numbers onto only that which needs them. The mechanics backing individual don't need to be bespoke or unique, only describe the key interactions.

>The mechanics backing individual don't need to be bespoke
I accidentally a word.
"...backing individual things..."

I agree to an extent, but I think you're kinda downplaying the importance of mechanics. The rules should always take a back seat to the roleplaying experience, only being made use of when it adds something to the game, but when you do come across a situation that needs rules the quality of those rules can have a real impact on the experience. If a GM isn't focusing on making not fit for purpose rules function in the way they need them to, they can concentrate on other things.

There are also situations where adding math does improve the experience. Combat systems are a clear example of this. While some people enjoy it, for a lot of people free form combat is rather unsatisfying, with a lot of grounds for abuse and other bullshit. Making combat its own mechanical minigame, with common rules to provide a frame of reference and enjoyable, unique mechanics to interact with makes it a lot more fun, at least for me and the groups I play with.

Unique or tuned mechanics aren't always necessary, but they can lend extra texture to a scenario, giving it a foundation in something other than pure roleplaying which adds something to the experience.

Of course, exactly how much mechanical weight you prefer is very much something that varies from group to group, but there's a reason there are a lot of different games for different playstyles.

Got a download link?

Oh, I definitely agree.
I'm not meaning to say you should free-form things, or that systems are functionally identical because you can ignore mechanical hooks, or that you should never leverage mechanical interactions. And I agree that combat being so weighed and measured, to a point, is not uncalled for, especially in PF which defines player characters mostly in those terms.

I was trying to get at the fact that you don't need to do something like dwell on every stat block, or call for a cavalcade of dice rolls for every little thing (which majorly hamstrings d20-based mechanics in general, especially if casters can bypass it), or something else that someone with less broad experiences with RPGs, or otherwise overwhelmed by the overall volume of content, might do.
And the "if it's not fun without math" bit was also meant to communicate, "design memorable encounters rather than obligated encounters," which I could have been more clear about.

I'll probably download it and read through it. Always happy to read more sci fi shit to steal from.

>I think it could be ok.
You're an idiot

Not betting on it, but I can see it happening if they're able to put enough aside.
Hell, if it IS any good I'm assuming people will reverse-hack things to make PF more consistent.

I think it's gonna be great for the kind of games I wanna run

You know what I mean, right?

I think i'd be willing to indulge my degenercy in that case.

user, we already had spelljammer, and I think it worked better aesthetically, even if you dont like the physics of the universe. The most broad strokes felt more "what would happen if wizards made spaceships?" Than what little I saw of starfinder. That one here feels more vanilla space opera, nothing wrong with that tho.

Kitsunes in space? :^)

Are you the /pfg/ OP? If so, I've kinda got to hand it to you, you've got one of the cushiest trolling methods on the board.

....bitchception?

D20 Conan, star wars saga, fantasy craft, true 20, iron heroes, m&m

You can very much do pretty good d20 without it being the same niche as Pathfinder.

Pathfinder player here.

Agreed, Paizo has interesting character ideas, but their policies result in terrible quality control and many many garbage options. Also, their policies regarding what "nonmagical" characters are capable of ensures there always woefully inferior. Finally, their understanding of the math behind their game is just insufficient, as evidenced by the poorly balanced skill DCs.

Their SJW pandering has occasionally ruined adventures, too.

But despite all of that, it's still a better 3.5e, because of the things they got right, and IMO it's got more to offer me than 5e does.

And /pfg/ is fucking weird.

Very little in Pathfinder is game breakingly good, but yes, there's a great deal that's game breakingly terrible.

I think it's supposed to be Spelljammer

My group has branched out into Shadowrun and Dark Heresy.

Mostly, they're fun. Though, it should go without saying, that's because the group and GMs are fun to play with.

There are issues that arise... like if we were playing physically Shadowrun's d6 fetish and totaling up the hits. Their sourcebook is also laid out completely ass backwards and system details a buried in fluff.

We haven't played it enough to really get it down, but it seems like there will be something of an issue with there being 3 potential layers to combat, (Meat, Astral, Matrix) and the system seemingly being set up to be more of a "Run of the week" while our GM wants to run an arching plot right off the bat, with us being street-level runners.

Dark Heresy feels a bit smoother, though we recently ran into genestealers... and the flaws of the system, such as giving a creature with a 50+% dodge chance the ability to dodge multiple times in a turn, begin to become apparent.

It's sourcebook could also be better cross referenced, but that's a minor quibble.

Iron Heroes and FC both have significant mechanical problems, and while I don't know much about d20 conan or True 20 I'll give you M&M and Star Wars SAGA.

But M&M has only gotten better the more different it's got from D&D, while Star Wars is very close to D&D in terms of themes- It's heroic fantasy in space.

Even with all that, I never said it wasn't possible- Just that the vast majority were fucking garbage.

D20 Conan is one of my go-to RPGs for low magic fantasy. Not perfect, but pretty good. True 20 is more or less m&m1 fantasy. It came first.

But yes, I've seen some shit d20 as well. D20 modern being the worst of the bunch.

Shadowrun can work with arcs. Played several ongoing Shadowrun campaigns. But it does lend itself to bring broken into episodes.

>moba
>good
pick one

Advent of the zenith is good.

But aotz doesn't exactly play like DotA or LoL.

As a diehard 3.pf player, I will gladly play a 4e game (a solid wonderful system that was killed before it could become truly amazing), but 2e (the game I started with) was shit, 5e is shit, and more than likely anything from before 1995 is complete shit judging from reading the rule books.

I've also run an M&M campaign, played in a Dark Heresy campaign, and attempted several other systems whose names escape me at this time. All of them just don't satisfy the itch that D&D does.

As to Starfinder, I'm looking forward to it, even if to just expand the lore I can steal from.

You sound like an awesome person I would gladly share a game with. Props to you user.

Haven't read it yet, but I'm betting it'll be the same quality as d20 Modern/Future was.

A steaming pile of worm infested shit that only serves to show that the d20 boom was a fucking mistake and the system is shit for anything but a specific brand of heroic fantasy.

I like HotS, Battlerite and am looking into Atlas Reactor.

I think they are all good.

Atlas Reactor isn't really a MobA, but it's still a pretty cool game.

...