Sammael
Adventurer
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.
This morning my dog ate all of the bacon off the counter before it could be cooked.
I blame Pathfinder.
That is sig worthy.This morning my dog ate all of the bacon off the counter before it could be cooked.
I blame Pathfinder.
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!
All Other Things Being Equal: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!
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.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.
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.
Do you have any links to this behavior? Is this an actual list of things you have seen or just some raving?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.
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.