Pathfinder 1E Does pathfinder strike anyone as too gamey?

[Starfox]

Why can’t Longstrider or Expeditious Retreat be cast on someone else, or made into a potion?

They cannot be made into potions? And one of the strengths of the alchemist is that they can make infusions of personal spells for others to use.

 

[Starfox]

Let’s put our Cleric at 5^th level as well. Why will the Cleric’s deity provide 2 third level spells each and every day, whether the Cleric uses them wisely or poorly? One casts Continual Flame twice a day to make streetlights for a city, the other is questing for his deity against his enemies. Yet the second can’t persuade his deity to send a Water Walk spell to save his faithful from drowning, while the first gets another two tomorrow to keep lighting the walkways for believers and non-believers alike.

Yes, it really is a shame that those silly, destructive adventurers get as much divine power as serious, conscientious society-builders. Shame on you, god!

(Yes, I am procrastinating, I ought to shut up here and go to the gym!)

 

[billd91]

yea and she also said the 2e fighter and the warblade where what she was looking for. Don't you dare say she wants a wizard of all of us she has been the most clair in wanting to play a weapon based martial character that can do amazing things... if you don't want that class to be fighter she is even willing to play a class with a different name as long as she gets to be a weapon using martial class that can do cool and amazing things...

isn't that part of her argument right there??? Again She has even in other threads claimed 2e was the best edtion... so please tell me what part of WANTS TO PLAY A MARTIAL WEAPON BASED CLASS THAT DOES AMAZING THINGS is wrong?

So.... what can a 2nd edition fighter do that a 3e one can't? He has relatively better saving throws. And that's it. The 3e fighter makes use of a greatly expanded feat system that existed only in rudiments in 2e that allow him to exceed the standard combat rules. So, frankly, I don't really know what it is you think you're trying to say.

 

[billd91]

How about being able to do non-amazing things? Taking someone's limb off with an axe blow, stunning them with a mace to the head, slicing a tendon in their leg to make it useless, taking up an Iron Door defensive stance to be temporarily unassailable, parrying into a riposte... Anyone wanting to say they think D&D Fighters should have "realistic" capabilities needs to explain why they don't get those things. It's not because the game doesn't support severing limbs, stunning, disabling, because it does. It's just that they're required to be done by magic no matter how unrealistic that is. And frankly, a mundane Fighter being able to do those things would be amazing by D&D's standards, even if reality wouldn't agree.

As Starfox correctly points out, D&D is a hit points game when it comes to combat. Those hit points are there, in no small part, to protect the PCs from being subject to exactly what you think fighters should be able to dish out on the opposition - hacking off limbs and other crippling injuries. That's why D&D has been so resistant to that sort of critical injury - because PCs would be subject to them far more often than individual NPCs. But there's no reason that effects like that can't be the province of dropping the target to 0 hit points since you'd normally figure that's the end of the fight anyway. Triple crit damage with the axe and the creature falls? Narrate that the creature's head's cut off - done. In fact, back in 1e days, being taken close to death and then being revived gave the DM license to inflict exactly that sort of injury - loss of a member or scarring. I suspect TSR let that rule die away because of playing complaints, though...

As far as stunning with a mace to the head, that's what feats are for. Any fighter can learn to stun his opponent with a knee to the groin if he wants to. And PF has added feats for imposing conditions on a target with a successful crit. So where you're seeing problems, I'm seeing plenty of solutions.

 

[N'raac]

They cannot be made into potions? And one of the strengths of the alchemist is that they can make infusions of personal spells for others to use.

You can create a potion of any 3rd-level or lower spell that you know and that targets one or more creatures.

Personal spells do not target creatures. They target "You".

 

[billd91]

really? that is what you take away from me asking to be a mythic hero... I guess in 3.x/pathfinder being a useful and exciting character is a casters mojo

No, I'm taking it from this statement

So no I don't care if the wizard uses his big guns, or when he changes the battle field. I care about me doing it.

Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...rike-anyone-as-too-gamey/page18#ixzz2gTigXHmE

From what you were saying there, it sounded like that because you have limited playing time, you don't want to spend it playing a character who isn't working with the spellcaster mojo when you can be playing one who is. As you put it, it sounds like your competition isn't with other spellcasters, it's with yourself playing a character doing those things vs not.

 

[Herschel]

By that point Michael and I had a combined 32 years of experience with D&D. Even when I started playing 3E I was playing it with 1E standards and have kept them with Pathfinder. 2E Skills and Powers had plenty of its own issues. Did my best to avoid it.

I have more than that alone, and you're wrong.

Thanks for playing.

 

[Campbell]

So.... what can a 2nd edition fighter do that a 3e one can't? He has relatively better saving throws. And that's it. The 3e fighter makes use of a greatly expanded feat system that existed only in rudiments in 2e that allow him to exceed the standard combat rules. So, frankly, I don't really know what it is you think you're trying to say.

The 2e fighter actually has several things going for him or her that the 3e fighter lacks:

• Saving Throws that get meaningfully better against the oppisition. The AD&D fighter is resilient in the face of danger and is not nearly as dependent on magical protection from spells. Also his saving throws improve with magical armor.
• All his attacks are at full THAC0 and hit bonus. Combined with across the board lower AC of relevent threats he hits hard and hits often.
• Weapon Mastery in AD&D is serious business. In the lower hp and AC environment of AD&D those static bonuses are meaningful.
• Good NWPs that are based off of Ability Scores so he is on much better footing outside of combat.
• Better comparative utilization of ability scores. Instead of fighting monsters that are generally tougher and stronger than him he tends to outclass much of his competition on an individual basis. He'll often be facing more enemies, but that results in an overall more badass feel.

All that being said, AD&D fighters are not that mechanically interesting from a character building or game play standpoint. They are scarily effective though. This is all based on recent experience in a game with 2e fighters. I haven't played or run much 3e or Pathfinder as of late though.

 

[Herschel]

You make some good points Campbell. There are a lot of people who wants more interesting "martial" characters. There are also a lot of people who want casters to be "superior" to the "mundanes" in that regard. Finding the middle ground is difficult since the variations are so widespread along the spectrum.

 

[billd91]

The 2e fighter actually has several things going for him or her that the 3e fighter lacks:

• Saving Throws that get meaningfully better against the oppisition. The AD&D fighter is resilient in the face of danger and is not nearly as dependent on magical protection from spells. Also his saving throws improve with magical armor.
• All his attacks are at full THAC0 and hit bonus. Combined with across the board lower AC of relevent threats he hits hard and hits often.
• Weapon Mastery in AD&D is serious business. In the lower hp and AC environment of AD&D those static bonuses are meaningful.
• Good NWPs that are based off of Ability Scores so he is on much better footing outside of combat.
• Better comparative utilization of ability scores. Instead of fighting monsters that are generally tougher and stronger than him he tends to outclass much of his competition on an individual basis. He'll often be facing more enemies, but that results in an overall more badass feel.

All that being said, AD&D fighters are not that mechanically interesting from a character building or game play standpoint. They are scarily effective though. This is all based on recent experience in a game with 2e fighters. I haven't played or run much 3e or Pathfinder as of late though.

I think the 2nd and 3rd points are, generally, a wash. The fighter in 3e often gets more attacks (sometimes quite a few more) depending on the feats he takes with high chances of hitting with just as many attacks as the 2e fighter plus the chance to hit with even more. He also has a high number of bonuses at his disposal that are easier to get in 3e than in 2e so that I think the relative effect of the bonuses in 2e is reasonably well covered in 3e.

The non-weapon proficiency system in 2e makes for an interesting comparison since, on one hand, it's an optional system in 2e that not everyone uses compared to a standard system in 3e. The 3e system, particularly as modified in PF, gives the fighter a lot of flexibility even if his starting values tend to be lower.

As far as comparative utilization of ability scores, I'm not sure that's easily quantifiable or comparable. The fighter in 3e has the power to change his scores in ways that a 2e character didn't if he's coming up short somewhere.

The saving throw issue is really the one issue that I think everyone can agree on. However, it too has some subtleties. For example, the fighter's saves up to level 8 are mediocre and that's where, apparently, most of the 1e/2e playing took place so I don't know that most players actually experienced the fighter's resiliency in full flower in the teen levels before the clerics and wizards catch back up. Also, it's pretty easy for a 3e fighter to improve his own saves with feats and cloaks of resistance. With this factor, I think the main culprits are the spellcaster's ability to pump up his casting stat to raise his DCs and the existence of weak saves that end up being a lot weaker compared to that maxed out casting stat than I think was initially intended.