Pathfinder 1E Does pathfinder strike anyone as too gamey?

[Ahnehnois]

I know it wasn't directed to me, but it seems when people say that they really mean they can play cool fighter concepts.

Cool is pretty subjective. To me, the idea that a character needs supernatural powers or their equivalents is pretty degrading to that character. A fighter compared to a warblade is much like a star athlete compared with a steroid-enhanced cheater. The latter may be able to temporarily boost his performance, which may seem great, unless you understand where it came from.

well there is your problem. I know a lot of guys like you, and normally after playing one or two spell casters they change there tune.

Well, besides being a DM, I've played almost all the core classes, cleric, druid, sorcerer, and wizard included. I'd much rather play nonmagical characters, and I find them at least as effective as the magical ones in almost all scenarios. I hate tracking spells and spell slots. I don't like relying on tricks that only work once a day. I like just doing stuff. My most effective characters are usually rogues. And I'm hardly speaking from lack of experience.

It's my observation that most [people] like you very quickly become appreciative of the value of the nonmagical classes after having played with a decent DM.

 

[gamerprinter]

ok so just to double check you get the final say in what is broken, and what the larger audience wants?? great who died and made you king of anything? I know plenty of people who love Bo9s, and what it represents, I also know plenty that call it anime crud... you know what I don't know is who is a bigger group. the difference is you think you know better then anyone else...

I never stated which is the larger group, nor whose preferences are better. I only stated my preference and my understanding that there is some segment of PF and 3x gamers who do not want Bo9S, whether it's large or small, who knows, and who cares? I'm not trying to limit the game to my preferences. I think anybody should play whatever they want, as long as everyone is having fun and mechanics aren't disrupting their game - what's fine for their table is fine for me. Even 3x is a huge game with Bo9S as one tiny part. There is so much possible material to develop, why should I limit myself to the concerns of fans of Bo9S.

I personally don't understand your angst against my POV - I'm not attacking yours (I don't even know what your preferences are). I'm not saying my POV is the only one or that it's better than anyone elses, (you're stating that I am, but I'm not.) I'm just saying this is what I want and don't want in my game and as a developer I will continue to develop the game the way I want to play it - and those fans that want the same thing. I have no idea what minority or majority prefers regarding anything in the game. As along as fans continue to pay for products I design - I'm guessing I'm pleasing some audience for the game, and that's all that really matters.

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

Cool is pretty subjective. To me, the idea that a character needs supernatural powers or their equivalents is pretty degrading to that character. A fighter compared to a warblade is much like a star athlete compared with a steroid-enhanced cheater. The latter may be able to temporarily boost his performance, which may seem great, unless you understand where it came from.

that is insulting... infact, you have just crossed a major line. you are comparing my fictional character who through nothing other then hard work and training to people who are doing illegal drugs and breaking the rules of there game to try to win. All I want is to have fun, and you make it sound like I am popping pills... very rude

It's my observation that most [people] like you very quickly become appreciative of the value of the nonmagical classes after having played with a decent DM.

oh that is just great now you want to insult my DMs... because they make fun games and interesting ways that are enhanced by my fighter knowing special maneuvers...

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

I personally don't understand your angst against my POV - I'm not attacking yours (I don't even know what your preferences are).

I only jumped into this thread to defend the point of view that you know claim to have... people need to just have fun... and for a not insignificant part of the D&D fandom starting with 3.0 D&D and going through 3.5 and PF fighters got a lot duller. Book of Nine swords and even later classes (see knight) and a lot of us also think that when caster got a lot of there draw backs taken away in those same editions (gee no level loss, or spell casting loss, or ageing from spells)

 

[gamerprinter]

oh that is just great now you want to insult my DMs...

Isn't this exactly what you did, in quoting my post? See your quote below...

I know a lot of guys like you, and normally after playing one or two spell casters they change there tune.

Rather you're insulting the players at my table, as if they'd never played a spellcaster - if they had they'd change their tune. So it's not OK to "insult your DMs" but it is OK for "you to insult me and my players"...?!

 

[Ahnehnois]

that is insulting... infact, you have just crossed a major line. you are comparing my fictional character who through nothing other then hard work and training to people who are doing illegal drugs and breaking the rules of there game to try to win. All I want is to have fun, and you make it sound like I am popping pills... very rude

Yes, I am making this comparison. In the context of D&D, discretized, use-limited character abilities that enable supernatural outcomes are generally restricted to a certain type of character (spellcasters) and generally come with significant mechanical and in-world restrictions and implications. Attempts to relabel those types of mechanics in the Bo9S as being products of skill rather than supernatural power violates the norms of the game.

For context, there's a case to be made that PEDs should be allowed-if the goal is to facilitate the best outcome. After all, the lines demarcating this type of "cheating" are quite arbitrary, and the distinctions between medical treatment, legal performance enhancement, and cheating are unclear. The case that all D&D characters deserve equal "fiat" or "plot coupons" is pretty much the same argument, and giving fighters spells is pretty much the same thing. The merits of doing so are debatable in both cases.

The implications of your original post I quoted are equally insulting. Why is every fighter that's been played before the Bo9S (and after, for that matter), not 'cool'? Since when did the Bo9S (or anything else) introduce 'coolness' to the game?

oh that is just great now you want to insult my DMs... because they make fun games and interesting ways that are enhanced by my fighter knowing special maneuvers...

Again, turnabout is fair play. Your original post insinuates that people who enjoy playing fighters and their ilk are incompetent or ignorant in some way, because they all haven't played a spellcaster. Obviously, this is false.

 

[gamerprinter]

Book of Nine swords and even later classes (see knight) and a lot of us also think that when caster got a lot of there draw backs taken away in those same editions (gee no level loss, or spell casting loss, or ageing from spells)

And there's nothing wrong with your point of view (I never said there was), however, there's also nothing wrong with my point of view. Our points of view are opposite, but that's perfectly OK.

I think the PF fighter is perfectly fine, and at least in our games competitive with the spellcaster to about 14th level - which is about where we max our PCs levels anyway. We have one player that always plays a fighter, and she never feels diminished by the other players, spellcasters included. One player plays a sorcerer, but most everybody else plays half-casters. So true martial and true caster PCs are rare in our group, most play rangers, paladins, inquisitors, bards. And everybody feels balanced to everyone else. Nobody in our group feels the need to add caster power to make our martials better. The Core and Base classes of PF are fine as they are. I only care to create new classes, alternate classes and archetypes. I don't want martial adepts.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Odd that this has now become the fighter/caster thread, and the fighter/caster thread is about some completely incomprehensible tangent.

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

Isn't this exactly what you did, in quoting my post? See your quote below...

no I didn't insult anyone saying X made something cool is very different from telling someone they need to find a better DM.

Rather you're insulting the players at my table, as if they'd never played a spellcaster - if they had they'd change their tune. So it's not OK to "insult your DMs" but it is OK for "you to insult me and my players"...?!

it's not an insult to suggest that when someone says I never did X" that maybe trying X may give them a different point of view...

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

Yes, I am making this comparison. In the context of D&D, discretized, use-limited character abilities that enable supernatural outcomes are generally restricted to a certain type of character (spellcasters) and generally come with significant mechanical and in-world restrictions and implications. Attempts to relabel those types of mechanics in the Bo9S as being products of skill rather than supernatural power violates the norms of the game.

I call BS. A drug that is harmful, and illegal is not the same thing I also argue that a lot of the powers I love in book of nine swords that are not magical at all.

The implications of your original post I quoted are equally insulting. Why is every fighter that's been played before the Bo9S (and after, for that matter), not 'cool'? Since when did the Bo9S (or anything else) introduce 'coolness' to the game?

more BS I came into this thread because someone was bashing what is one of my favorite supplements. I came in and said "I believe when someone says that this is what they mean" and was quickly jumped on.

Again, turnabout is fair play. Your original post insinuates that people who enjoy playing fighters and their ilk are incompetent or ignorant in some way, because they all haven't played a spellcaster. Obviously, this is false.

no what I suggested is that someone should try another point of view... but somehow it has turned into people being even ruder then when I started.