Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="grufflehead" data-source="post: 5272532" data-attributes="member: 35977">I'm probably going to get a slap from a mod for this, but here goes - you did, after all, ask for our thoughts.*Deep breath*Nothing personal, but these 'this has been nerfed' threads decrying things that a person doesn't really are my number 1 pet dislike about messageboards. My opinion of the community here is, while we have plenty of Pathfinder players, we're not rabid optimisers (so 'build me an uber-<insert name of class>' threads tend to get short shrift) nor are we particularly bothered by the minutiae of the rules. What ever happened to creating a character and letting it develop over time, shaped by events? People who post optimal 20 level builds make me wonder why exactly they are playing the game.I'm not it any way trying to stifle debate as everyone is entitled to their opinion, but just for info, there are 3 things people really need to consider:- those guys who write the rules? They actually know a bit more about game design and balance than you, me and most of the geniuses over on the Paizo boards who run their mouths at the drop of a hat. Remember, the changes have been made in reference to a months long open playtest, rather than just 2 guys in a room deciding on a whim what they are going to do. Changes are based on testing and feedback from players.- the APG weighs in at well over 300 pages. It has so many options in it, it's going to take me weeks to pick through them all. I work in an industry where a success rate of 95% is the standard to aim for; if 5% of the many class or race options, feats, traits, spells etc are ones I personally don't like, then that's absolutely an acceptable hit to miss ratio, so I just get on with it. Or don't play the game.- people are quick to forget rule 0. If you as a GM want to let a player have the playtest version Summoner, go right ahead. If you want to play in a game and use a playtest Summoner, negotiate with the GM about it. If (s)he says no, go and look for another game if it bothers you so much.Oh, and here's number 4 for free seeing as I'm in such a generous mood: regardless of the bleating, the Summoner is NOT by an stretch of the imagination a weak class - saying it over and over does not make it true. You (and plenty of others) may think it is noticeably less powerful now but it is still an extremely potent class. The most common argument I've seen for how it has been 'nerfed': It's not as powerful as a druid. So Paizo introduce a class which isn't as powerful as the one which, by a majority of people's reckoning, was the most potent class in 3.5, and that's supposed to be a bad thing? Aye, right, as they say round these parts...Perhaps anyone who feels hard done by might like to try this little exercise: in 3.5, let's say you wanted to play a 'summoner' i.e. someone whose major shtick was to summon critters to fight for him/her (I saw this tried twice). Let's say you decide on Sorcerer. Try statting up a Sorcerer focussed on casting Summon Monster at 1st, 5th and 10th, and compare it to a 'nerfed' PF Summoner at those levels.Houserule the crap out of it? Yeah, I'd houserule it with the ban stick - it's a dreadful class (IMESHO) which does nothing to enhance the game. It fulfills no role that can't be done by an existing archetype, so it's purpose is one-fold: power creep pure and simple. Difference is, I don't really feel the urge to start threads on various boards crying about it.Grufflehead's 1st law of gaming: when a company introduces new material and options to an existing game, the power (tending to imbalance) of any new option is directly proportional to the number and relative volume of posters who jump onto messageboards and enthusiastically embrace it.And there have been a lot of people saying that the Summoner is (sorry, *was*) the greatest thing since divine metamagic</blockquote>

Verification