Pathfinder 1E Does pathfinder strike anyone as too gamey?

[Stoat]

I at the very least have gotten used to it.

There you go. That's the solution to all your problems right there.

 

[Angrydad]

I at the very least have gotten used to it.

see that is what made my group leave 4e and go to gurps and WoD

my complaint is that you have to bend over backwards to make it work...Anyone CAN make come and get it make sense, but it takes a lot of work. the problem is that somehow 'because pathfinder' is an ok reason for the same craziness. (Someone explain the in game reason for grit, or for a cure light becoming non magical water in another PCs hand) it just feels wrong.

The thing to fix your complaint is one of the Alchemist's Discoveries, which simply allows his potions to persist so others can utilize them. I believe they get a Discovery at 2nd level, if I remember correctly. I know it seems lame to have to use a Discovery to share potions, but the Alchemist can masterfully brew potions in his down time, which would be shareable, and the whole gimmick with the class is self-experimentation, so it kinda makes sense flavor-wise to have potions only work on the creator.

 

[brvheart]

Pathfinder has its gamey aspects as do other games. I have not had a lot of issues with the Alchemist in my game except he seems to be able to blow up about anything he faces. He is level enough to pass out his CLWs now.

 

[Tovec]

The thing to fix your complaint is one of the Alchemist's Discoveries, which simply allows his potions to persist so others can utilize them. I believe they get a Discovery at 2nd level, if I remember correctly. I know it seems lame to have to use a Discovery to share potions, but the Alchemist can masterfully brew potions in his down time, which would be shareable, and the whole gimmick with the class is self-experimentation, so it kinda makes sense flavor-wise to have potions only work on the creator.

Agreed. Like I said last time it seems like he is using the first level of probably the worst offender for "gamey" and saying PF = 4e levels of gamey, which simply doesn't seem to be true when you compare literally anything other than the first level alchemist.

But, sure OP I'll agree: the worst of PF is AS BAD as 4e. Congrats. But as always, play what you like

 

[Stormonu]

The alchemist stipulation is kinda wierd, but all the classes from the Advanced Player's Guide strike me as a bit more gamist than the core classes. Just about all the classes in that book have spontaneous points-per-day use abilities with an expected encounter-per-day allotment for their abilities. I think that 4E had a strong influence on the classes in that book, and there was an effort to keep closer to original 3E with the core book. However, I really like a lot of the Advanced classes myself. Summoner is my favorite, but I guess I just like companion creatures (go Pokemon!).

 

[Herschel]

And you expect 5e to be less gamey!?

And salt to be less salty!

 

[dagger]

We play pretty much Core PF (just the main rule book) only for character creation and I like it better that way.

 

[brvheart]

We use mostly core for classes and have tried some of the other classes and restricted others: Oracle, Summoner, and Magus. I do use most of the feats and archetypes though.

 

[Rob1207]

I think I am done with pathfinder (we were 2nd level and the alchemist didn't have that magical share power, when I said he should he said he took the ability to make wholes in his bombs so he didn't hit us) I am trying to get my group to try 5th edtion D&D, I kinda like what I read

 

[GMforPowergamers]

The truth is that Piazo cashed in on the edition war, but didn't really do anything different then WotC. It changed enough of the rules to invalidate the best late comers for 3.5 classes, but not enough to fix the core issues of the system. If you really want to see the rules evolve D&D next (5e) may be for you...