Goddamn, there is a fighter archetype in PF all about wielding huge fucking great weapons? WHY DID I NOT KNOW THIS.
[QUOTE=elowin;49911221]Taking the example of using a huge weapon, it's really not the same if it's not represented mechanically.
Using a huge two hander that's bigger than yourself is cool as fuck, but not so much when it doesn't actually do any more damage than just a regular sword. That just makes it seem silly.
And there's absolutely nothing stopping you from focusing on characterization just because feats are a thing. I don't really see how they dictate anything?
Similarly, there's nothing stopping the GM from saying you can do whatever in Pathfinder as well.[/QUOTE]
your feats don't dictate anything, but they reinforce a way of thinking about your character that you might have had at the start of the game, but may no longer be the case.
case in point, if you are a titan fighter, then you are going to feel compelled to stick with this as your archetype even when it might no longer be useful or sensible in terms of story or mechanically - unless you're willing to put up with pathfinders pretty restrictive and poor retraining rules (let's be honest here, who has ever retrained major parts of their character)
and the fact that pathfinder is heavily focused on the crunch meant that people were less willing to do things that weren't in the crunch, but might be reasonable actions to take - when you have less crunch, you have people who are more willing to try things that aren't in the crunch
[editline]11th March 2016[/editline]
if you're going to go down the route of "there's nothing stopping the GM from X" then you can simply hack the titan fighter into 5E, but then the argument completely breaks down
5e > pathfinder fight me nerds I'll take the fucking lot of you
[QUOTE=Mellowbloom;49911329]5e > pathfinder fight me nerds I'll take the fucking lot of you[/QUOTE]
Better take that shit back m8, or I will get my dad to hack ur PC (he works at MS).
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;49911287]your feats don't dictate anything, but they reinforce a way of thinking about your character that you might have had at the start of the game, but may no longer be the case.
case in point, if you are a titan fighter, then you are going to feel compelled to stick with this as your archetype even when it might no longer be useful or sensible in terms of story or mechanically - unless you're willing to put up with pathfinders pretty restrictive and poor retraining rules (let's be honest here, who has ever retrained major parts of their character)
and the fact that pathfinder is heavily focused on the crunch meant that people were less willing to do things that weren't in the crunch, but might be reasonable actions to take - when you have less crunch, you have people who are more willing to try things that aren't in the crunch
[editline]11th March 2016[/editline]
if you're going to go down the route of "there's nothing stopping the GM from X" then you can simply hack the titan fighter into 5E, but then the argument completely breaks down[/QUOTE]
I only brought up that the GM can do whatever because you did, mate.
I still don't really get your argument about feats, to be honest.
Like again, taking the example of big two handers, yeah it would be hard to switch from that to some finesse based weapon. That makes perfect sense to me, you're specialized in big weapons so that's what you're best at. You could still use other weapons but you don't get the benefits of having specialized in them. But that's pretty much the same as the fighting style choices you get in 5e, no?
And I don't really agree that less crunch means people are more willing to do things that aren't in the crunch, unless you go all the way and have almost no crunch at all, and make it almost completely free-form. In games that have little crunch, but still have strict crunch, my experience is generally that it still subtly encourages people to stay within the crunch, which just ends up more restrictive. But that whole argument is just personal anecdotes.
[QUOTE=Mellowbloom;49911329]5e > pathfinder fight me nerds I'll take the fucking lot of you[/QUOTE]
good luck with that i have a small wooden buckler that grants me as much AC as the largest tower shield :^)
[QUOTE=elowin;49911339]I only brought up that the GM can do whatever because you did, mate.
I still don't really get your argument about feats, to be honest.
Like again, taking the example of big two handers, yeah it would be hard to switch from that to some finesse based weapon. That makes perfect sense to me, you're specialized in big weapons so that's what you're best at. You could still use other weapons but you don't get the benefits of having specialized in them. But that's pretty much the same as the fighting style choices you get in 5e, no?
.[/QUOTE]
i disagree
weapon specialization, something that is an absolute must for fighters, is insanely restrictive because it means that the player is inclined to [I]only use that specific weapon[/I]
sure, you still have weapon profiencies in 5e (they're basically nothing) but you don't have situations where someone at the very start of the game specialized in a specific thing desperately searching for that specific thing later on
got to remember that, while your titan fighter is specialized in big weapons, you're almost certainly going to be specialized in a specific kind of big weapon or you're gimping your build - in my 5e campaign the martials have been much more willing to pick up something else when it's been better, rather than saying "i'd have to retrain to use this magic longsword, so I'm not going to use it"
the insanity of weapon specialization is that in a previous pathfinder campaign, we found an extremely powerful longsword that [I]nobody would use because it wouldn't have fit with their builds[/I]​
but yes, everything else you said related to what i said is entirely personal anecdotes
Oh, that reminds me, has anyone got their hands on Curse og Strahd yet? If so, what did you think of it?
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;49911340]good luck with that i have a small wooden buckler that grants me as much AC as the largest tower shield :^)
i disagree
weapon specialization, something that is an absolute must for fighters, is insanely restrictive because it means that the player is inclined to [I]only use that specific weapon[/I]
sure, you still have weapon profiencies in 5e (they're basically nothing) but you don't have situations where someone at the very start of the game specialized in a specific thing desperately searching for that specific thing later on
got to remember that, while your titan fighter is specialized in big weapons, you're almost certainly going to be specialized in a specific kind of big weapon or you're gimping your build - in my 5e campaign the martials have been much more willing to pick up something else when it's been better, rather than saying "i'd have to retrain to use this magic longsword, so I'm not going to use it"
the insanity of weapon specialization is that in a previous pathfinder campaign, we found an extremely powerful longsword that [I]nobody would use because it wouldn't have fit with their builds[/I]​
but yes, everything else you said related to what i said is entirely personal anecdotes[/QUOTE]
What you said regarding it was also based on personal anecdote. The entire argument regarding whether less crunch actually encourages going outside of the crunch, is completely personal anecdote, that was my point.
How narrow the weapon specialization feat(s) are is pretty dumb tho, yeah
[editline]11th March 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Mellowbloom;49911329]5e > pathfinder fight me nerds I'll take the fucking lot of you[/QUOTE]
good games > d20 games
i dont even have to fight you nerds i win by default
Hey you fucks, who wants to eventually help me test an expansion for Magical Burst. You get to be gruff military men and women and kill anime. No, it's not finished, but I need to gauge interest, and I can probably finish it up if I see people wanting.
[QUOTE=gufu;49911384]Hey you fucks, who wants to eventually help me test an expansion for Magical Burst. You get to be gruff military men and women and kill anime. No, it's not finished, but I need to gauge interest, and I can probably finish it up if I see people wanting.[/QUOTE]
I've always wanted to roleplay a grown man curb stomping a cute Japanese girl but usually I have to go on f-list for that kind of thing, sign me up
can i be a gruff military wizard?
[QUOTE=Funktastic Dog;49909358]If a setting is any good, spellcasters will ALWAYS be stronger than non-spellcasters, it comes with the territory of literally breaking the physics of reality.
But on the same token, spellcasters will also be much more complicated to play.[/QUOTE]
The 'setting' doesn't matter in that discussion. If we're talking about D&D as a rules system, then two people of equal level should be about equally powerful. If they're not, then what's the point of measuring ability in levels in the first place?
[QUOTE=Antary;49911538]The 'setting' doesn't matter in that discussion. If we're talking about D&D as a rules system, then two people of equal level should be about equally powerful. If they're not, then what's the point of measuring ability in levels in the first place?[/QUOTE]
power levels are bullshit
[QUOTE=Fire Kracker;49911154]don't get me wrong i mean 5e is super cool and all, but like all 5e classes are stronger than their 3.5/75
like with the feats and stuff from 5e you can make a paladin hit for a minimum damage of 13 at level 1, which is enough to destroy anything in a hit at that level
it's that pf has more options to customize your character which is cool af roleplaying wise
and i can think of no other game(well i can, just not dnd based) that literally lets you be a henshin hero or have a stand from jojo other than pathfinder with the summoner[/QUOTE]
I think there is one build in D&D 3.5 which allows you to deal over 60 damage at level 1.
The numbers are meaningless between editions, because they change so much, so comparing them really isn't viable
And it's fundamentally different tones that result and that's alright. I don't think anyone (except Mellowbloom) is arguing that one edition or version is just objectively better. It's okay to like ridiculously complex systems, it's okay to like really simple ones, and you can do awesome things with both (unless you're hitting like, FATAL levels of complex, but that's not a fair statement to make) so this back and forth about which is 'better' is completely needless and circular
Different strokes for different folks. I like labyrinths of rules and ten thousand splats and little changes and options. Some people just want to roll a single die and be told 'things go smooth' or 'things don't go smooth'. Some people want to have strict balance or progression, others like things running amok and going insane. It's all perfectly acceptable to like, but there's no 'right' answer out there that universally holds
[QUOTE=SiberysTranq;49911669]The numbers are meaningless between editions, because they change so much, so comparing them really isn't viable
And it's fundamentally different tones that result and that's alright. I don't think anyone (except Mellowbloom) is arguing that one edition or version is just objectively better. It's okay to like ridiculously complex systems, it's okay to like really simple ones, and you can do awesome things with both (unless you're hitting like, FATAL levels of complex, but that's not a fair statement to make) so this back and forth about which is 'better' is completely needless and circular
Different strokes for different folks. I like labyrinths of rules and ten thousand splats and little changes and options. Some people just want to roll a single die and be told 'things go smooth' or 'things don't go smooth'. Some people want to have strict balance or progression, others like things running amok and going insane. It's all perfectly acceptable to like, but there's no 'right' answer out there that universally holds[/QUOTE]
yeah but if we aren't arguing over editions then what is there to argue over
my imaginary character could beat up your imaginary characters
[editline]11th March 2016[/editline]
STOP DISAGREEING WITH ME YOU FUCKS
my imaginary character can beat up superman and super saiyan god super saiyan 2000000 goku at the same time
"35 new posts since I went to bed oh man I wonder what it could be?"
"Oh, it's literally just an edition war now. Okay then."
All editions are good in their own ways. Some people are bound to like one more than others, and they may not like the edition you love, but that doesn't make them hitler. :dog:
[QUOTE=Rats808;49911860]"35 new posts since I went to bed oh man I wonder what it could be?"
"Oh, it's literally just an edition war now. Okay then."
All editions are good in their own ways. Some people are bound to like one more than others, and they may not like the edition you love, but that doesn't make them hitler. :dog:[/QUOTE]
excuse me, 4e is literally hitler
it killed my dog
[QUOTE=elowin;49911889]excuse me, 4e is literally hitler
it killed my dog[/QUOTE]
false
Hitler loved dogs.
[QUOTE=Rats808;49911860]"35 new posts since I went to bed oh man I wonder what it could be?"
"Oh, it's literally just an edition war now. Okay then."
All editions are good in their own ways. Some people are bound to like one more than others, and they may not like the edition you love, but that doesn't make them hitler. :dog:[/QUOTE]
To be fair this is a pretty civil discussion all things considered. People aren't flinging shit and boxes all over the place.
[QUOTE=kyle877;49911910]false
Hitler loved dogs.[/QUOTE]
hitler played and loved 4th edition
[editline]11th March 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=TectoImprov;49911945]To be fair this is a pretty civil discussion all things considered. People aren't flinging shit and boxes all over the place.[/QUOTE]
fuck off pathfinder is shit and gay
if you like pathfinder you are shit and gay
argue with me
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;49911950]hitler played and loved 4th edition
[editline]11th March 2016[/editline]
fuck off pathfinder is shit and gay
if you like pathfinder you are shit and gay
argue with me[/QUOTE]
5e is shit and gay
if you like 5e you're hitler's son
fite me irl
You're both shit and gay.
[QUOTE=Crimor;49912191]You're both shit and gay.[/QUOTE]
are you the one GURPS player in the world
has he finally been found?
We're all shit and gay in our own ways
authors note: GURPS is also shit and gay
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;49912245]authors note: GURPS is also shit and gay[/QUOTE]
i'm going to kill you with my cape
i have over 30 skill in cape fighting
[QUOTE=FetchingToaster;49910177]System crunch and roleplay are not mutually exclusive.
You can have roleplay in systems like pathfinder, and I'd say that crunch-heavy systems give you MORE options for roleplay based on what people have on them, what's for sale, etc.
I'm not saying that crunch-lite systems are bad, but my preference definetly lies with the crunch side of things.[/QUOTE]
Bretty much this. the more systems = more options for awesome shit imho
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
