Pathfinder is the worst blight on the tabletop community that has ever existed...

I think the point user is trying to make is 'it's super popular' doesn't really invalidate those complaints. Something can be bad and still very popular.

Except those are all literally objective true. Name the huge "improvements" WoTC made to the magic system. Please enlighten me.

>troll begs to be fed

Here's your "you". Next time, don't pretend your wrong opinions are "literally objectively" anything. It basically makes it clear you're incapable of even basic discussion, since you're so firmly attached to your incorrect beliefs.

...You tried to put him down for claiming his opinions are objective, only to claim that your opinions are objective instead and his are just wrong? You realise how stupid that sounds, right?

>5anboy can't handle criticism of the game he worships but doesn't have any counterargument
Sasuga, 5anboy.

>trolls super fucking pissed that they were so easily seen through

How do you even function on this site if you actually think such obvious and pathetic trolling isn't obvious? Here's your last pity (you) from me.

What? I'm not involved in the conversation, I'm just pointing out how your argument was inherently hypocritical.

There was no pretending. What he was saying was literally actually objectively true and you have posted no defense otherwise in ANY of your shitpost responses.

Nah, honestly, the worst blight on the community is the Chan community. Pathfinder is Shit, sure, but it has its market and it's a great indicator of bad players and GMs. No, the Chan community, the part that tends to bitch about games rather than play them, the part that actively seeks to make itself angry about meaningless things and then attempt to find a scapegoat they can blame it all on.
Pathfinder may have the worst players, but it's Veeky Forums that's got the worst people in the hobby, the ones that don't even play.

They tried to do balance in 4e, but that just resulted in autistic screeching from the Grogs.

>One of my sons was excited about Starfinder... Until he saw how different it was from Pathfinder. He is no longer interested. Starfinder will not find it's way into my home. Pathfinder will never leave our hearts.
I think this is the definition of cuckoldry.

You see this fucker? This fucker is the cancer that Paizo created and catered to.

These people can't ever let things advance, ever. They started with 3.5 D&D, and it's all they will ever play. The whole reason Pathfinder found any success was because these people were sold on the idea of "no you can totally use your old books."

You ever tried to use a pathfinder book with a 3.5 supplement? It "works", but in the same way that using a self-driving screw on a too small hole works. Sure, it's fastened, but not especially well and there is some kind of damage as a result.

And frankly, I've always been fucking amazed as the sheer amount of people that Paizo managed to dupe into thinking they were going to make 3.5 better. It was fucking Paizo. The people behind the 3rd edition era Dragon and Dungeon magazine. Did people forget what utter dogshit they were?

No, they just would ignore it because it would "invalidate their shelf." Because these people have only and will only ever play one game.

And it's this attitude that ensures that pathfinder will always be fucking awful and will always draw in the worst people. Because they catered to an audience of grognards who couldn't bare to see things change, and this is what they're stuck with now.

>it's Veeky Forums that's got the worst people in the hobby
God I'd give my left nut if the worst people in the hobby were only as bad as Veeky Forums.

It's almost like there was an entire edition between 3rd and 5th where everyone gets to have fun.

But seriously, though, one of the greatest shames of 5th edition is WoTC hastily throwing out the positive lessons of 4th edition.

Talk about that edition belongs on /v/ though, not Veeky Forums.

>has the worst sales of any Star Wars movie ever.

Um...no. It's grossed $1.298 billion so far, and it's still selling tickets in theaters in noteworthy numbers (Source: I just went last Saturday with my brother and the theater was packed). Attack of the Clones grossed $649.4 million in 2002, which adjusted for inflation would be about $884.9 million today.

Hang on, I've got nothing better to do, so let's rank each live-action Star Wars theatrical release by box office performance, adjusted for inflation.

1. A New Hope: 3.1 billion
2. The Force Awakens: 2.16 billion
3. The Empire Strikes Back: 1.609 billion
4. The Phantom Menace: 1.52 billion
5. The Last Jedi: 1.298 billion
6. Return of the Jedi: 1.180 billion
7. Rogue One: 1.08 billion
8. Revenge of the Sith: 1.076 billion
9. Attack of the Clones: 884.9 million

For the record: All initial numbers before inflation were taken from Wikipedia. All inflation calculation was done at:

data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl

The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi have estimated box office ranges rather than set numbers; I used the lower of the two numbers in each case.

Basically, once you adjust for inflation, the only Star Wars movie that doens't crack a billion is Attack of the Clones; and The Last Jedi at present is actually in the middle of the pack.

...

Why do I have to bring in a tier list, and then start saying "this class isn't allowed" in order to start having the game be decent? And on the flipside, what if I really wanted to play a character that was too high or too low on the tier list you're suggesting we use to be in the same area as the other players? What's the solution?

Spell DCs do not climb beyond the reach of people to pass them, ever. The highest a spell save DC could be is 19 by level 17, which means no matter the spell, anyone with at least a 10 in their ability score has at minimum a 10% chance of saving against it.

There's a recurring troll in /5eg/ who's out to "prove" that 5e is a worse system with a worse playerbase than PF. It's why there keeps being multiple threads for /5eg/ up at one time, he'll make a troll thread where he'll post anime and fetish shit when a real thread is autosaged on page 4, then when we ignore him and make a separate thread that won't get deleted (as his often do) he'll spam links to his fetish thread and announce that he's saging and reporting. At least he got banned enough that he doesn't spam Shadman pics anymore.
This is the kind of autist that PF attracts.

No, it doesn't and that's actually a huge tragedy.

The edition that would have translated so incredibly easily into a video game, and nothing good was ever done with it.

Concentration means that it's difficult to impossible for a caster to stack multiple buffs upon himself and make himself invulnerable.

If you wanted to prove that 5E's playerbase is worse, all you have to do is point at the autistic faggot who shits up an entire thread the second metacurrency or anything more complex than the Champion is brought up in his presence.

>bitter cunts feel like shitposting again

For fuck's sake. What compels these cunts to get all uppity about a game they don't even play? It's like they think the game raped their mother and this is the only way they can seek vengeance, shitposting so hard that they don't even remember what the actual truth looks like.

The main thing they did was nerf the effect of each spell. People will tell you other bullshit, but that was the main systemic change. Compare 3e stinking cloud to 5e stinking cloud, the 5e one is way weaker. Compare 3e color spray to 5e color spray, 5e color spray does nothing.

I don't post in 5e threads, but is there someone who really loses his shit over something as simple and underwhelming as battlemaster?

Why the fuck are you biting at such obvious and blatant bait?

Everyone knows he's wrong. Even he does. There's no point in trying to explain to him why he's wrong, he's just being wrong just to get replies out of you guys.

Wow tfa punched pretty high

>everyone who disagrees with me is baiting, stop trying to have an actual discussion, all you need to know is that I'm right because I said so!

Weak

Debates are for the audience you idiot, not the debaters.

They did make that Neverwinter MMO based on it. Was actually quite fun for a time because shortly you could just max out a character by murdering dragons all day with a shit ton of people joinig in.
Unfortunately it became a massive grind when they expanded the levelcap and just scaled old content and have you walk through the areas in opposite order.

Fuck you edition wars are a tradition of Veeky Forums they date back it it's inception. I welcome these threads not for their content but for the nostalgia factor of a Veeky Forums dead and gone under a flood of pol bantering and bad fetish threads that don't end with bitches for thulsa doom

People wanted a good star wars movie again.

The prequels had left a bitter taste in our mouths.

>5e playerbase
>worse than Pathfinder

Lolno. 5e's playerbase is filled with LOL NATURAL 20 screeching normies but Pathfinder players have that plus furries plus waifushit plus 3e grognards and blind fanboyism.

Not sure who you're talking about, the most recent autism over Champion was the UA Brute archetype replacing it as the "training wheels" subclass. And I don't think I've seen anyone bitching about metacurrency as a concept in a long time.

See for yourself.

Holy shit that's hilarious.

You were saying?

I'm pretty sure any attempt to make a 4e game would end in commercial disaster. Other editions are brainless enough to be coded as a small scale RTS with hero units (magic users), but 4e would have to be unapologetically turn-based and use a grid, and it would need to have some sort of rewind mechanic to implement conditional abilities. Instead of another shiny AAA Bioware turd you'd have a weird hybrid of relatively loose world exploration and very tight Heroes-style combat.

$10 says it's the same autist trying to shit up the threads now. Notice how no one agrees with him.

>you'd have a weird hybrid of relatively loose world exploration and very tight Heroes-style combat.

6e should be 5e with pieces taken from Star Wars Saga Edition.
Fite me.

>tradition
Shitposting isn't a tradition, it's an unfortunate disease we have to deal with, not something we should respect or try to maintain.

You might as well call cancer a tradition, and burn down all the cancer centers.

>I'm pretty sure any attempt to make a 4e game would end in commercial disaster
Not really. The mechanics of 4e were laid out pretty clearly, and it wouldn't take a genius to find ways to translate them into something that feels good for a video game.

>Other editions are brainless enough to be coded as a small scale RTS with hero units (magic users), but 4e would have to be unapologetically turn-based and use a grid
Not really. If anything, what you're describing would fit 4e really well. You've basically decided that it could only work this way because that's a near 1:1 of the game mechanics without bothering to think.

>and it would need to have some sort of rewind mechanic to implement conditional abilities.
Not really. Button prompts, automatic reactions, there are a ton of ways that you could deal with conditional abilities.

If I said "I want to play *insert weeaboo fightan magic class here*" in a 5E group, I would have a zero percent chance of getting my way instead of getting referred to the trash heap that is BM Fighter.

The Brute is, completely unironically, what the Champion should have been.

If I wanted to play a weeaboo fightan magic class, I'd convince my DM to give me the Mystic because it's basically a better Warlock.
Or I'd play Pathfinder- with exclusively third-party content.

Yeah, most people are calling it the "Revised Champion." The problem some people have is whether or not such a class that has so few options is actually good for its supposed role of introducing brand new people to tabletop, and whether such a class sets a dangerous precedent for new martial material.

I mean...if you want to do the legwork of converting the classes from Tome of Battle to 5e, go ahead, and once you're done with it I'd let you run it at my table provided they were balanced properly (which here means that I don't want to see, like, a DC 25 save or die effect or something)

But I personally have no interest in converting the classes myself.

What, no, battlemaster is fine and not at all a trash heap. I love my interactivity to be limited by a meta resource that, once expended within 1-2 turns leaves me with no option but "I attack." It's not at all like have the maneuvers for battlemaster are pointless due to both how weak they are and that the ones that inflict status effects are the same ones that would be near useless against anything you'd want to use it against.

It would be so much easier if they just let Battlemaster use any maneuver they had at d4 every turn, or choosing to spend a d8 instead. Increase it when the main die increases to d6/d8.

>literally refuted several times by multiple people
>still trying to troll

Give up.

A class that has no flexibility is never a good idea because if the game is designed properly at all, it binds how powerful and flexible alternatives to it can be. It's exactly why 4E refused, and was right to do so, to entertain non-AEDU classes until psionics.

And people did the same autistic screeching when 5e was announced and came out. people do the same when new codex's and books for 40k.

Its not pazio fags, its nerds, nerds are retarded

Down that slippery slope lies getting nickle and dimed until what I'm playing is a ToB that's inferior in every way to throwing my hands up and asking an actual 3.5 or PF group to let me play ToB, and at the end of the day, even if I was allowed to play it, I've done a truckload of work to do something that should have been baseline.

In a official setting yes, here its more "who can have a bigger autistic shitfit" battle

>that should have been baseline.

Why?

I really liked 4es system. Mostly because it killed LFQW and thus spellcasters hated it.

Why not?

Although it is a problem, the unique statues of 3.PF is an interesting one. A single product becoming so dominant over an entire medium is rare, and one so obviously and notably flawed being held in a position of such reverence suggests there is something special going on there.

I've heard an interesting argument that it's flaws are vital to its longevity. The logic goes that, given its buggy as hell state, every group who played 3.PF ended up investing a great deal of time and effort into figuring out how They wanted to play it, personalising and customising their experience extensively to the point that they think 3.PF is fantastic, even if what they play is substantially different to core 3.PF.

When a flaw is pointed out, they react defensively because that flaw doesn't exist in Their .3PF, but they're too invested to really be aware of the difference between the game they play and the game that actually exists in the book. Meanwhile, when compared to another game that they've not had an opportunity to so extensively adapt, or to a game which doesn't need the same amount of work or investment, they get a feeling of discomfort and unfamiliarity, so used to wrangling 3.PF that playing RPG's outside of it is an actively unpleasant experience for them.

I'm not sure I buy it as a general thing, or even a common one, but I have seem specific groups display habits that would almost exactly match these predictions, and it might explain the more ardent and tireless 3.PF defenders and fanboys who refuse to acknowledge any flaw in it, regardless of how obvious or well known it is.

Well, the mechanics of the Battlemaster all are working against one another.

Superiority dice are tied to your ability to do bonus damage, but they're also used to activate your abilities. And you get a maximum of six of them.

However, when you get that six of them, you're also able to attack six times in one turn. Which creates the problem of you can, and arguably should, just blow your entire wad in one go. And if you're looking to maximize damage (which is what you should want to do as a 5e fighter) there is an optimal choice in maneuver every time - feint.

So you feint and hit six times in a turn, and now you're on autopilot, with your only meaningful action being declaring that you attack.

It doesn't help that gutting the opportunity attack also was a pretty indirect kick to the knees of the fighter as well

>If I said "I want to play *insert weeaboo fightan magic class here*" in a 5E group, I would have a zero percent chance of getting my way instead of getting referred to the trash heap that is BM Fighter.
That has nothing to do with what I said. Paizo's fanbase is far worse than 5e's.

Look, if you want to play 3.5 or Pathfinder, then just go play 3.5 or Pathfinder. I won't stop you. I wish you happiness and many natural 20s, even.

I have no interest in converting the ToB classes personally because I feel that no class should be able to replace another class - that was my issue in 3rd Edition (and I had a similar problem vis-a-vis the Factotum replacing the Rogue) and it would be my issue with a 5e conversion of the classes.

But having said that, taking the Eldritch Knight subclass as a base and using it to model the rate at which you gain maneuvers for a new Warblade subclass seems fine. I just personally don't feel like doing it.

No, ego tripping faggots who want to play god Wizards hated it. Anyone who wasn't retarded realized that it cut cruft out while still leaving you as one of the most important party members for overall success, but instead of your party being shit the instant you decided not to bless their efforts with your fleeting attention, they could hold their own without you.

It's so depressing what we ended up with. The D&D Next fighter prototype had their dice refresh every turn.

No, user, that's not how this works. Answer my actual question.

That has everything to do with what you said if you stop and think about what it implies.

If a class isn't fit for purpose, isn't replacing it entirely a good thing?

Because I sincerely doubt that weeaboo fightan magic is going to do more of a number on the game's balance than the core Bard or the impotence of stupid classes like Champion and Ranger already have.

The problem with the mechanic in the playtest was that it was becoming all consuming.

Everyone was getting expertise dice, everyone had maneuvers, and it was just getting to be too much.

Unfortunately, as WoTC has done repeatedly with 5th edition, their strategy was to over-correct. So maneuvers had to be weaker, they had to be more limited, they needed to be kept in a corner and they couldn't be something that could be used frequently.

Still seems like wasted potential to me. I'd love to see an attempt at a rework that actually made the every round maneuver dice actually function properly.

>see playtest packet when it's new
>immediately think "Oh cool, they're stealing the combat dice pool mechanic from old Shadowrun except you use it for maneuvers instead of allocating die to offense or defense directly, that might be cool in a few iterations."
If only I knew.

>The problem with the mechanic in the playtest was that it was becoming all consuming.
>it was just getting to be too much
What did you mean by this?

The mechanic started on fighters, and then they gave it to Clerics and Rogues and were talking about giving it to other classes.

Personally, I think it'd have worked great as a general Martial mechanic shared by all non-caster classes. Instead, as the other guy said, they overreacted, nerfed the shit out of it and presented the Battlemaster as the only remnant of a once amazing idea.

No. Fixing the class is preferable. SEE: the Revised Ranger in 5e as compared to the standard PHB ranger; or the Pathfinder Unchained Rogue as opposed to its standard variant.

A lot of these classes have literally decades of history behind them. I don't want to see them thrown out like so much trash, I want to see them fixed if they're not working right. Although having said that, in my experience all of them work just fine in practice. The Wizard, for example, never has enough spell slots to be the Swiss Army Knife everyone is so afraid of: in order to prepare enough spells to be useful outside of combat on a regular basis, it needs to make itself useless IN combat. And sometimes a spell is actually strictly worse than its non-spell equivalent. For example, note that Invisibility in 5e doesn't actually grant any kind of bonus to Stealth checks. The wizard can't be seen, sure, but his ability to sneak around is still dependent on whatever his Stealth modifier is. At most he might be given advantage, but that's going to be worse than a Rogue with high Dexterity and training in Stealth, especially if the Rogue has Expertise.

Knock, as well, is usually worse than picking a lock, since it creates an audible knocking sound that can be heard up to 300 feet away - but in most cases, when you're picking a lock you DON'T want to be heard.

The fighter can kill things just fine, you just don’t enjoy playing it.

IIRC, it was also finding its way over to monks by the end of the playtest.

The problem is that "being fun to play" is something that is part of the classes purpose. As a result the fighter isn't fit for purpose. It can only do half its job.

This is the most retarded thing I have ever read.

The fighter is “not fit for purpose” just because you don’t like it?

I guess I don't have the same reverence. I quite happily threw Fighter in the trash when Warblade came out, because it did the same thing but better. Then again, when 4e had the Fighter actually be good I was happy, but if there's trash content in an edition I don't see the problem in making something that replaces it with something better, since companies are often loathe to rework things or go as far as they need to to do so.

Also, our experiences on toolbox wizards differ. I've seen plenty of cases where a spell selection has dominated a game, although out of combat is honestly far worse a problem than in combat in my experience. It's just easier to prove how OP they can be in combat numerically, while out of combat is more about game context and how a GM is forced to warp the entire game around it if they don't want magic to be a simple 'Solve problems instantly' button.

You missed the "you" part, you dumb troll.
God, you really need to stop treating your personal opinions as facts already.

If a class involves no meaningful choices in combat, and no interesting utility out of combat, then I think calling it not fit for purpose is entirely fair. Classes are meant to give you interesting and enjoyable ways to interact with the game, and the Fighter isn't doing that. And no, playing 'Mother May I?' with your GM doens't count.

Tl;dr: Pathfinder is a cult that causes brain damage.

>forced to build into one single gimmick if they want to stay relevant without the DM babysitting you
>loads of trap options on the build level, don't bother with archery, TWF, sword and board, or any non-trip combat maneuver if you want to be effective
>every gimmick they have is easily nullified
>zero noncombat ability
>inability to cope with mechanics that become more and more prevalent as the game goes on, like save or lose, miss chance, anything with standard action hit and runs
The Warblade replacing the Fighter was the best thing that could have happened.

No class is going to be able to satisfy everyone all the time, user. I personally don't like playing Wizards, for example. But I have plenty of fun as a Champion Fighter or Thief Rouge.

Mostly Thief, I admit, I love being the Thief.

The point being that just because YOU don't enjoy the Fighter class doesn't mean that NO ONE does. And Wizards has actually, demonstrably responded to feedback about classes in 5e - the Revised Ranger, for example.

They've outright stated that whether or not a class gets an overhaul depends upon two factors: whether players think the class is good; and whether or not players enjoy the class. The Ranger was at the bottom of both lists, so it's getting an overhaul. But, for conversely, players may not think the Fighter is good, but they still enjoy playing it, so Wizards doesn't see a need to fix it.

Magic is almost never a "solve problem instantly" button. Any DM who runs it as such has only themselves to blame, most likely for not reading spell descriptions closely enough.

>Any DM who runs the game by the rules has only themselves to blame
lol

I'm saying it's not fit for purpose because it's not. Part of making a class good in an RPG is making it fun to play. Fighters do not have anything that really makes them enjoyable. There are external things that make the game fun to play outside of the class (example: roleplaying) but the fighter as a class offers no real way to engage and have fun with the class.

To borrow slightly from video gamedev terminology, the fighter lacks game feel.

Can you please stop reacting to this troll?
Yes, it's nice feeling superior to such an idiot, but you're literally just doing nothing but adding to the post count of his troll thread. He's going to walk away feeling accomplished for being a succesful troll, and return here just to do the same "I'm such a fucking idiot" routine all over again.

fuck off fun police, I’m enjoying myself. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t make this threat not fit for purpose