Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Anguish" data-source="post: 4892976" data-attributes="member: 27032">I should preface my comments that it strikes me you're disinclined to be satisfied here and that you're operating on a have-made-up-your-mind basis.  I could be wrong, but I'm getting that feeling.It's impressive damage and I admitted as such.  It is however focused and specific damage.  This isn't terribly different from talking about psions being overpowered because they can nova.  Sure, there are circumstances where a psion comes out ahead.  But in typical play it doesn't work out that way.Again, halfway through his career a paladin can at best do his extra damage to four evil opponents.  If you're up against CN, N, LN or CG opponents you're just out of luck.  If there are more than four of them in a day, you're out of luck.  If you pick the wrong ones, you're out of luck.  If you're busy being grappled, or fighting off a spell, you're out of luck.  My point is that it's conditional.  Highly conditional.  Yes, it's likely going to get used on the BBEG if the player can figure out who it is.  Sure.  But it's not broken.Think of this like a more limited version of a ranger's favored enemy.  Sure it maxes out at more damage, but it's less frequently applicable.Well.  That was sort of a nasty paragraph.  But hey.It's kind of funny.  We're talking about abstract numbers.  Hit points and damage-per-hit.  Yet you're suggesting 3.5 was just right in it's numerical abstraction and PFRPG is full of ubermensch?The problem is that in 3.5 my group rarely played paladins because they were visibly inferior to most other classes.  Aside from role-play potential (which is admittedly huge) most other classes played out a lot more interesting on the table.  PFRPG gives the paladin enough useful and meaningful that it's suddenly fun to play again.Immortal?  Undefeatable?  Broken?  No.  Play the system.  Seriously.  It's fun, which last time I checked was the goal of the whole bloody hobby.  Give the rules a chance as written and forget the numerical comparison to 3.5 core.  Give it a try as a complete solution.  I've got no more arguments left for you since you basically don't accept any of what I'm saying so far.Not at all.  What's going on with monsters is that they're being adjusted to be more appropriate.  I've got no great examples off the top of my head, but there's been a lot of thinking put behind this too.  One that I can relate is that undead now have a d8 hit die.  Why did this change from d12?  Simply so that they can have undead with more hit dice but lower overall hitpoints (or the same).  It's a mechanical way of having the option to make their saves better (for instance) or their BAB better (for instance) without giving them an extra twenty or so hitpoints.Some monsters are being re-evaluated as to how they actually play at the game table.  Some CRs are just wrong.  Some monsters will be rated at lower CRs than we're accustomed to seeing written because they're actually easier than rated, when actually played.  Some higher.  Some will be adjusted to more appropriately model the CR that the creature should be at.Paizo has never made a secret that part of what they were doing was making the core 10 classes and the core races more powerful to be more in line with the last several years worth of expansion materials.  It's sort of an arms race in that sense, I suppose.Still, I have to say from the player's end, adventures are a lot deadlier than they used to be.  I'm a much smarter player now than I was six years ago, but Red Hand of Doom handed me more dead character sheets than I can shake a stick at.  It's fun that things have gotten more dangerous, and it's fun that now I've got a few more toys to work with.Try it.  Seriously.</blockquote>

Verification