but its a forum. and I like to rant there is another thing I hate more than 4th though and thats World of Warcraft. Thats right I said I HATE WOW. Now what?? I have seen Too many people turn into mindless Zombies over a stupid game that is easy to play easy to level. Its like a bunch of children staring at the new shiney thing going ooo and ahhh. If the future consists of games like 4th and WOW where a child can play a game with little challange. A freaking 8 year old child can create a char in 4th and do well. I like my games where int.. is involved just just a RPGMMO on paper or computer where any dumb tool can play
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Pathfinder 1E Why I play pathfinder
- Thread starter McKreagon
- Start date
- Status
Dannager
First Post
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh my god.
This is fake, right? This has got to be fake. Burning books, rabidly anti-4e, bubbling over with intelligence-elitism while misspelling every other word, WoW-is-for-8-year-olds?
This is the best thread ever.
Glade Riven
Adventurer
Wow...I'm surprised there's not some administrativly red text in this thread about the hostility.
Now lets just calm down my bad spelling has nothing to do about my ranting even though man I know I cant spell.. But even you have to admit World of Warcraft is too easy for its own good. I cant even say it was good at one time cause from the beginning it was horrible. It drew people in like a fire draws in Months but instead of killing the bugs WOW just make them more stupid as they sit on there computer for hours after hours after hours of mindless nothing that WOW has to offer....
Dannager
First Post
This is spoken like someone who doesn't really know that much about WoW but has heard plenty and filled in the rest with imagination. End-game heroic 5-man and raid dungeons can be sadistically hard, and going for heroic raid achievements on top of that means that only the absolute best of the best can claim to have truly mastered the game. Similarly, anyone can participate in PvP, but the greatest rewards are reserved for the select few who make up the most skilled PvP players.
WoW is a game that is easy to pick up and easy to dive into. It is also a game that is extremely demanding if you want to make a name for yourself in the end-game. You need to be mentally agile, have an absolutely complete mastery of your class and its abilities, and know every fight like the back of your hand. I don't take anyone who calls WoW "D&D for 8 year-olds" seriously. They don't know what they're talking about.
Your poor spelling isn't a big deal, except for the fact that you have been claiming mental superiority over the plebeian masses who make WoW their opiate of choice. If you're going to make fun of a group of people for being mentally sub-par, it's a good idea to use spell check.
@ Dannager: Thank you for taking my post, chopping it up and serving it outta context to enhance your own side of the argument. I statted that it had been a while and that I did not still recall the exact details of the games I have played. Further more, while some of it was exaggeration, I did have at least 4 at wills all of which had a stronger effect then the mage in the group's encounter and daily powers. You said the pally was a defender style, I would expect a defender's abilities to be defense oriented, but he 1 shotted one of the major enemies we had in the game with an at will. Fluke? maybe, don't really remember details except the DM frowning and saying congrats, and removing the piece.
As for the group I played with, maybe they were. Only 1 guy had looked seriously at 4e, the one who decided to give the 1/2 hour lecture on how basic attacks were pointless and at wills rocked.
I was using "fireball" as an iconic reference, no one in the group threw a ball of exploding fire anywhere, but we all had effects that had a similar effect on the state of the battle (except the mage)
As for spell casting of a paladin, here let me grab my PF books. we have spell levels 1-4, 15 spells in level 1, 5 of which are 0 for anyone else who has them, 9 in level 2, 10 in level 3 and 9 in level 4. Lets now look at spells per day. at level 20, the paladin gets 4 at 1st, 4 at 2nd, 3 at 3rd, and 3 at 4th. Yes there are bonus for High Cha, but compare to even bard and Inquisitor spell lists. As for actual spells, lets see, cure light, mod and serious, bless, dispel chaos, holy weapon, get the trend? A pally has the worst casting for offensive spells of any caster (ranger at least gets SNA) their "healing spells" are worthless next to lay on hands, you cant even justify the the cures harm undead cause lay on hands does too. Unless I am missing something, a pally built to cast spells as any kinda focus is kinda in trouble. They do have buffs for weapon use, they are a fighter +divine powers, not through spells so much as through the lay on hands and divine bond. Not digging out my 3.5 books, But I know there were even variant pally that didn't cast anything at all.
Side note, powers may not be spells, but should a person able to warp reality do less effect then a loser with a sword and board. Maybe the mage rolled bad and I did awesome, I do not remember the exact details, just talking with the guy later and comparing our powers and finding he kinda failed at doing anything constructive in combat. If you were worried about the power level between a fighter and a wizard, 4E certainly changed the playing level between them in my experience.
I really can not say if the characters were built wrong, as all the groups characters were pregens that after about 4 games I stopped going to and tossed, so no I did not just try it once, I even tried it with a second group a month later and it still sucked IMO.
If what I said about my experience did not sound fun, maybe, and this is only a wild guess mind you, but just maybe, IT WASN'T but that is my experience with it
As for the group I played with, maybe they were. Only 1 guy had looked seriously at 4e, the one who decided to give the 1/2 hour lecture on how basic attacks were pointless and at wills rocked.
I was using "fireball" as an iconic reference, no one in the group threw a ball of exploding fire anywhere, but we all had effects that had a similar effect on the state of the battle (except the mage)
As for spell casting of a paladin, here let me grab my PF books. we have spell levels 1-4, 15 spells in level 1, 5 of which are 0 for anyone else who has them, 9 in level 2, 10 in level 3 and 9 in level 4. Lets now look at spells per day. at level 20, the paladin gets 4 at 1st, 4 at 2nd, 3 at 3rd, and 3 at 4th. Yes there are bonus for High Cha, but compare to even bard and Inquisitor spell lists. As for actual spells, lets see, cure light, mod and serious, bless, dispel chaos, holy weapon, get the trend? A pally has the worst casting for offensive spells of any caster (ranger at least gets SNA) their "healing spells" are worthless next to lay on hands, you cant even justify the the cures harm undead cause lay on hands does too. Unless I am missing something, a pally built to cast spells as any kinda focus is kinda in trouble. They do have buffs for weapon use, they are a fighter +divine powers, not through spells so much as through the lay on hands and divine bond. Not digging out my 3.5 books, But I know there were even variant pally that didn't cast anything at all.
Side note, powers may not be spells, but should a person able to warp reality do less effect then a loser with a sword and board. Maybe the mage rolled bad and I did awesome, I do not remember the exact details, just talking with the guy later and comparing our powers and finding he kinda failed at doing anything constructive in combat. If you were worried about the power level between a fighter and a wizard, 4E certainly changed the playing level between them in my experience.
I really can not say if the characters were built wrong, as all the groups characters were pregens that after about 4 games I stopped going to and tossed, so no I did not just try it once, I even tried it with a second group a month later and it still sucked IMO.
If what I said about my experience did not sound fun, maybe, and this is only a wild guess mind you, but just maybe, IT WASN'T but that is my experience with it
Dannager
First Post
This is nonsense. There is no Paladin at-will in the game that can come anywhere near one-shotting any non-minion enemy close to the party's level, let alone a "major enemy". Either you were following different rules than the actual game, or you're misrepresenting what occurred. Either way, what you are depicting and sharing with the rest of the forum community as representative of 4e is not actually representative of 4e in any way whatsoever.
Also, I'm really curious as to how you got "at least" 4 at-will attack powers as a Paladin.
This says everything about the fighters-can't-have-nice-things mentality. Wizards are able and encouraged to warp reality. Fighters/Paladins/martial character everywhere are "losers with a sword and board".
For better. Fighters no longer feel like second-class PCs compared to wizards at high levels. Both are able to contribute meaningfully to combat, your hilariously misrepresented caricature of 4e aside.
and when the day is done and the dust clouds settle. those people can look back and admire all the waist of time that they put on world of warcraft. Oh sure the endgame is hard. but I play games for story line and not repetive garbage and cartoon like graphics. And I sure in hell dont Pay for a game and then have to Pay again each month to play the game. I have no problem admiting that I have not played enough of WOW to give a true sound judgement. The little I have played I was bored the story was crap and the graphics was even worse.
Dannager
First Post
Yep, this is a troll.
- Status
