Pathfinder 1E RPG.net ripping Pathfinder apart

[Sammael]

This morning my dog ate all of the bacon off the counter before it could be cooked.

I blame Pathfinder.

The dog's CMB was obviously better than bacon's CMD.

 

[Piratecat]

Thank you, r.b.

Carry on, folks!

 

[SPECTRE666]

This morning my dog ate all of the bacon off the counter before it could be cooked.

I blame Pathfinder.

That is sig worthy.

 

[kitsune9]

I just spent an amusing half an hour browsing the RPG.net negative Pathfinder thread. Linky: [Pathfinder---] What don't you like? - RPGnet Forums

Actually, even if someone is ripping my favorite game or setting, I would read their posts if they construct an argument. Granted if they just say, "This sucks", it's kind of a waste of time. However, if they say, "This sucks, because it's underpowered/overpowered, they should have done X instead of Y." Those statements get me thinking about the rule or the topic. Maybe, I might see their point of view and it resonates me. Maybe I'll come up with a houserule or maybe I'll just disagree because my belief in X is affirmed.

There are some things about Pathfinder that has made me go "YAY!", some things that made me yaaaaawwwwwn, and other things that have made me say, "This really sucks." I can understand that Pathfinder cannot please me in every aspect, which is fine with me.

So for me, let people rip on the game because even a negative idea can generate something positive.

Happy Gaming!

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Actually, even if someone is ripping my favorite game or setting, I would read their posts if they construct an argument. Granted if they just say, "This sucks", it's kind of a waste of time. However, if they say, "This sucks, because it's underpowered/overpowered, they should have done X instead of Y." Those statements get me thinking about the rule or the topic. Maybe, I might see their point of view and it resonates me. Maybe I'll come up with a houserule or maybe I'll just disagree because my belief in X is affirmed.

There are some things about Pathfinder that has made me go "YAY!", some things that made me yaaaaawwwwwn, and other things that have made me say, "This really sucks." I can understand that Pathfinder cannot please me in every aspect, which is fine with me.

So for me, let people rip on the game because even a negative idea can generate something positive.

Happy Gaming!

I'd love it if RPG.net went into actual and intelligent discussion about Pathfinder and it's flaws...but it doesn't. They don't talk about how to improve Pathfinder. They don't talk about houserules or other things they could do to patch up problems with the system. Instead, they make conspiracy theories about how Pathfinder is illegal. Or how Paizo secretly hates WotC and wants to destroy it. Or bizarro personal attacks against the actual Paizo employees.

When EN World had it's own turmoil, we had a lot of emotional and negative posts being flung on both sides. But get this - that's died down, big time, and most of the really problematic posters (Hell, myself included) are either calmed down or have taken a break, letting intelligent discourse reign again. We have intelligent posters. RPG.nte's d20 forums don't have that. Instead, you have people like Arc-tan, Flawless Glory of Silence, or Christopher V. Brady, who aren't intelligent posters. They're trolls who would've been banned at any other forums in existance. They quite literally post only to put down Pathfinder, insult Paizo, and directly state that fans of either are deluded morons who are being cheated. But, because they're insulting Pathfinder and not 4e, they're given free reign to do whatever they want.

Once again, I get more intelligent discourse about Pathfinder from 4chan then I do RPG.net. At least there the trolls trolling trolls are trolls, know it, and make no motions to dismiss it. RPG.net's d20 forums are filled with trolls who take themselves completely seriously, believe gaming is SUPER SERIOUS BUSINESS, and feel that anything that in any way tarnishes 4e, be it a criticism of the system or any form of competition, is evil. Not evil in a "oh ho ho, that's kinda bad," way, but int hat they honestly believe that Pathfinder is some horrible illegal creation made to purposefully destroy Wizards of the Coast. It's absolutely 100% insane. And the moderators are their whipping boys.


tl'dr, I guess my point is, this thread is a bit of a misnomer, because there isn't anything good or bad to get about Pathfinder from reading RPG.net. Just a whole lot of neckbeard frothing rage mixed with crazy.

 

[Felon]

Regarding the limited in scope mechanics: I'm not sure they're bad just because they're limited. Hell, swim itself is limited.

But here's the catch - if you're in a campaign that involves water, in which you'd learn swim? That rage mechanic is no longer limited. On the contrary, it becomes awesome. If you're in a nautical campaign, suddenly that barbarian is a beast in the water.

I think there's a bizarro thought process that limited = inferior. It doesn't. Yes, the rage ability is specialized. So if you aren't in situations where you'd need its specialization, don't use it!

All Other Things Being Equal:
Moderate Boost that Provides Braod & Consistent Utility > Big Boost that Provides Limited & Inconsistent Utility
Moderate Boost that Plays to a Character's Strength > Moderate Boost to Mitigate a Character's Weakness

Even in a nautical campaign, you can bet that a boost to swimming will generally be percieved as inferior to a boost to attack and damage rolls. After all, you can consistently count on making attack and damage rolls. You cannot consistently count on how often you'll fall into the water and need to make a bunch of really tough swim checks, even if your combats are frequently taking place near water (it probably won't happen more often than you'll be making attacks). If your combats are consistently taking place in water, then chances are the two-handed-weapon-wielding barbarian is in a poor situation even with a boost to his Swim skill.

If Pathfinder barbarian rages do exhibit a crazy pendulum swing between benefits that are broadly useful in virtually every combat and benefits that only come into play once in a blue moon, then (assuming these benefits are drawn from the same pool), I have to reluctantly concede that the RPG.net critics have a point in calling this lopsided design.

Having said that, my copy is still on its way from Amazon and my expectations remain high. I hope we don't have barbarian abilities that pertain that pertain to holding objects in your mouth.

I'd love it if RPG.net went into actual and intelligent discussion about Pathfinder and it's flaws...but it doesn't. They don't talk about how to improve Pathfinder. They don't talk about houserules or other things they could do to patch up problems with the system.

Well, the way a lot of folks see it, house-ruling and patch-ups are for the birds. If you buy a product and it doesn't work right, you got grounds to complain. The onus should not be on you to find constructive ways to patch it up with duct tape.

When I bought Iron Heroes, I had a brief honeymoon period before I realized that it was basically a very rough draft of a really neat idea for a class-based RPG. It was a big disappointment and my group went back to playing D&D. But whereas Iron Heroes was just Mike Mearls writing a game system by himself with a small set of playtesters, Pathfind had one of the most comprehensive development stages for any RPG ever. If it comes out of the box as a big mess, then that's kind of outrageous.

 

[Darrin Drader]

People are acting like stupid jerks on the internet? My god, say it isn't so!

Of course everyone in this forum knows what the best version of the game is and on what forums you can find quality discussions about it.

 

[Starbuck_II]

When EN World had it's own turmoil, we had a lot of emotional and negative posts being flung on both sides. But get this - that's died down, big time, and most of the really problematic posters (Hell, myself included) are either calmed down or have taken a break, letting intelligent discourse reign again. We have intelligent posters. RPG.nte's d20 forums don't have that. Instead, you have people like Arc-tan, Flawless Glory of Silence, or Christopher V. Brady, who aren't intelligent posters. They're trolls who would've been banned at any other forums in existance. They quite literally post only to put down Pathfinder, insult Paizo, and directly state that fans of either are deluded morons who are being cheated. But, because they're insulting Pathfinder and not 4e, they're given free reign to do whatever they want.

tl'dr, I guess my point is, this thread is a bit of a misnomer, because there isn't anything good or bad to get about Pathfinder from reading RPG.net. Just a whole lot of neckbeard frothing rage mixed with crazy.

Isn't that unfair:
If the thread in RPG.net is labeled about what you dislike about Pathfinder: then to post off topic would be praising it. Naming calling/insulting those posters on that topic is also off topic and usually considered trolling so the guy was banned for the day.

I'd kinda call that good Modding. The guy was obstructive for no reason. Possibly anger that the "Not like" topic was longer than the "like" topic there, but one can't control that.

Now I kinda don't know RPG.net's history if in the past they trolled on RPG.net the Pathfinder discussion/praising topics there, but at least on that thread they were acting like rationale beings.

At the WotC forums Arc-Tan has had many intelligent posts. So I can vouch that he can be intelligent at times.

 

[JoeGKushner]

It's interesting that there are indeed several things that are 'legitimate' problems that quote the Pathfinder SRD directly. Hopefully people aren't merely passing those over in favor of saying that somehow where all else fails Pathfinder is perfect.

 

[doppelganger]

I'd love it if RPG.net went into actual and intelligent discussion about Pathfinder and it's flaws...but it doesn't. They don't talk about how to improve Pathfinder. They don't talk about houserules or other things they could do to patch up problems with the system. Instead, they make conspiracy theories about how Pathfinder is illegal. Or how Paizo secretly hates WotC and wants to destroy it. Or bizarro personal attacks against the actual Paizo employees.

Do you have any links to this behavior? Is this an actual list of things you have seen or just some raving?

A quick trip to rpg.net's d20 forum showed me these threads:

[Pathfinder] New Class: The Spellblade - Revised

Why should you switch from 3.5 to Pathfinder?

[3.x/Pathfinder] Balancing Magic and ... Saves?

as well as the [Pathfinder---] What don't you like? thread that sparked the OP's complaint.

Yeah, I'm not really seeing the connection between getting banned for calling gay people deviants and edition wars.

And keep in mind those guys have a nasty rep for banning and then lying about the reasons for it.

This is post that started it all