Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Daztur" data-source="post: 4900229" data-attributes="member: 55680">That doesn't change the general point. They reduced the number of overpowered spells so you don't have as much of a selection to choose from but there's still at least one powerful save or suck/be removed from combat spell every level and that's really all you need to make the caster be overpowered. As far as the other melee character abilities, I'm not really seeing anything (except for Paladins) that makes up for the power attack nerf (which was the main bread and butter of melee damage output in 3.5ed).Rescaling monsters doesn't fix a problem in the PC classes and it doesn't matter that there are more ways to boost saves since there are also more ways to boost the save DC and if you provide both of them, it tends to be easier to boost one number (the DC) than three numbers (the three saves).This is purely a personal taste question, I think that 3.5ed was already too complicated and Pathfinder added more bells and whistles (removing dead levels etc.). I'm sure some people like the added features.Well in 3.5ed a lot of multi-class options were very very weak (pretty much any multi-classing that involved a caster) so there are a number of band-aid feats and PrCs that fix that problem but only if you take that specific feat or PrC. Pathfinder isn't changing this system.What I meant by the "made it worse" part is that more things are tied to class level than before (look at monks for example) so now a character like a fighter/monk or rogue/monk or paladin/monk would be significantly weaker than before despite not being powerful to begin with. For me at least, this is highly annoying.Hit points was never really a limiting factor to the adventuring day once cure light wound wands became available.*shrugs* Don't see a big difference here. There's still a crapload of magic items to keep track of.Definite move in the right direction but I've still got to cry for the poor poor fighter's 2 skill points.Probably a good business decision for Piazo, just personally annoying for me.How so?I'm not a big fan of how Piazo carried out their playtesting. They wanted people to play the game normally and then report issues that came up during playtesting rather than have people crunch the numbers from a more statistical perspective or run sanity tests.Basically I have nothing against Piazo, I just think that they really dropped the ball on revising 3.5ed. They had a lot of good ideas (some skill changes, some aspects of CMB, various spell changes, cleric domains) but on the really big make or break issues they either didn't change anything of real importance or made things worse. It seems that Piazo has a good grasp of D&D fluff but I just don't think that they looked at the crunch side of things with the right amount of statistical rigor. I don't want to be rude, but giving the wizard (the most powerful core class and arguably the most powerful class period) a large power boost is just crazy.</blockquote>

Verification