Dan Talks Games

This $15 Pathfinder bundle gets you an entire library for D&D's biggest rival, at 97% discount For only 15 bucks, Paizo's latest Introduction to Pathfinder bundle packs in 26 digital books, map sets, and more worth over $450.

For only 15 bucks, Paizo's latest Introduction to Pathfinder bundle packs in 26 digital books, map sets, and more worth over $450 ⬇️

#PathfinderRPG #TTRPG #TabletopRPG
www.wargamer.com/pathfinder/b...

I've spoken to some good OSR types who were more than happy to explain it in ways that were genuinely helpful and gave some solid holistic insights, but there's definitely an abundance of sweatiness there that does no favours to the perception.

Or complaining about the fact they can't find anyone to play the games they want.

GEE I WONDER WHY THAT IS

It's like either way, you put this much effort to being petty and mad about a game you don't like, instead of just putting effort into making your shitty AI-generated OSR good.

Either way, it's a lose/lose that makes them look like a terrible person.

My favourite take was someone saying 'you have no proof this is AI' and I was like, my brother in Gorrum (R.I.P.), if they actually put effort into this without LLM assistance that just makes it *worse* because it means they're a malding gooner who also has terrible prose and syntax.

...and they were like, yes that's what we *want.* I was like, okay you run your wishy washy game with no consistent rulings because then you get to play armchair designer, I'll be here playing a game I don't have to design core systems for because I actually paid for a good product.

Like I had one of the weird throwaway accounts on the sub arguing with me the other day that old GMs had to write notes in their rulebooks to house rule mechanics that weren't covered. I said that's basically just the 'back in my day I had to walk 5 feet in the snow' of RPG takes...

The sad part is it doesn't seem to be a 3.5/1e system mastery glazer, it's some guy wanting to sell his hack AI generated OSR.

But OSR/old school players tend to have huge chips on their shoulders about games like PF2e because they seem them as too rules bloated and creatively restrictive.

YouTube video by Mathfinder The sky is not falling! - Pathfinder 2E Errata Review

www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0Zn...

This video was supposed to come out tomorrow, but editing it was MUCH easier once Paizo fixed the issue that was gonna take up the final 20 mins of it!

The errata is otherwise excellent. It has a lot of cleanups/clarifications that make #pathfinder2e a better game!

There really is something uniquely triggering about the game that sets off a lot of these opinionated grognard-y types and I'm legitimately beginning to suspect it's because they feel insulted and patronised about the fact they don't get it and/or think the game is judgemental of them.

Thread is on the subreddit if anyone cares enough to deep dive, but it really doesn't soften my thoughts that these people who really fucking hate PF2e and go out of their way to bash it are just some of the most obtuse and vindictive gooners I've seen on the internet.

Apparently someone hacked a pathfinder2e domain site to simultaneously post AI genetated slop about why the game sucks, while linking to their shitty OSR filled with AI generated slop.

I won't repost to avoid Streisand-ing them, but it's simultaneously sad, pathetic, frustrating, and hilarious.

Graphic Design Is My Passion layed out in the worst way possible.

I can’t find the original source for this visual crime, but I let out a cry of pain when I saw it.

It doesn't help people like me are chomping at the bit for more gishes or playing with spellcasting in new and interesting ways like the necromancer is, and we're just getting a few generic martials that have a very good case argument for them just being another archetype.

While I'm sure slayer and daredevil will play differently enough to their similar counterparts to carry their concepts, and can be done without just power creeping the old options, I do think they come across as very unnecessary in terms of classes we absolutely 'need' to fill uncovered niches.

...while simultaneously forcing a lot of existing classes to be retuned around them. It's not worth it even at just a Remaster-level errata effort.

But that's why I think the better middle ground would be introducing these concepts holistically through archetypes rather than new classes.

At the same time, I get it'd be a lot of inordinate effort to retroactively add these new ideas as a baseline. It's the same logic as psychic amps; Paizo *could* go back and staple them to the core system for other classes to use, but it would require reprinting the core rules to accommodate...

I also don't think more classes are inherently bad, and I don't think PF2e's niche-locking is as restrictive as people claim it is, but I do think the game risks class bloat if it releases classes with concepts that could be more evergreen, rather than truly unique concepts.

And don't get me wrong - I'm all here for more environmental interactivity. It's what the cryptic is all about, after all, and the reason I feel so strong about it is that I do legitimately think it's a cool idea that's underutilized in PF2e's design.

I'd rather see these on archetypes, or even just new subclasses or class feats for existing classes, rather than having to introduce a new class just to introduce the very novel concepts of 'using the environment to propel off and damage shoved enemies' or 'gain more options to use with quickened.'

I feel this is a big part of the issue I have not necessarily with the core system design for PF/SF2e, but with how the class design choices (not even inevitabilities) kind of silos off these ideas I think would make great holistic evergreen rulings.

So ala the new playtest classes... #pathfinder2e

In a vacuum they have some solid ideas. Prop and Reckless are great traits, and the daredevil doing environment damage for forced movement is solid even if it's blatantly riffing off Draw Steel.

I just don't think they're worth whole new classes.

Also the irony with the magus nerf is that IW wasn't even that good of a build for it.

Magi that go all-in on slot machine gambling with big Spellstrike hits are extremely unreliable. IW may have been cheap and easy, but it just exacerbated an already ineffective solution.

So I think it was justified, but also I agree a big part of the problem is the community is too FA-pilled for its own good. It's something I noticed making our new class, explicitly forcing myself to not design with variant rules in mind changes your perspective on the value of certain mechanics.

I think psychic definitely had some issues with certain casters (like sorc and wizard) having such mediocre low-level feats, that even in standard play it was better for them to dip psychic and grab a good amp.

Easy dip ancestry options like Multitalented and Ancient Elf could do this as well.

The whole 'the subreddit hates house rules/homebrew' thing is a crock made up by the exact people who'll crash out the moment Paizo makes an errata change they don't agree with or think is right, because they just want an excuse to change the RAW to something THEY want.

...that they should be having those discussions with instead of complaining to upper management about it and taking out their anger on other players.

Or they play multiple groups they just want to use RAW as a bludgeon to justify playing how they want across them all.

...and know both what their preferences are they can tweak, along with things they think are legitimately tuning issues Paizo isn't fixing themselves.

The people who complain need to either be spoon-fed assurance what they want is right, or are stuck in groups with strict RAW-only GMs...

It wasn't people who liked casters complaining about cantrips being nerfed, it was the people unhappy with them and saw it as salt in the wound that Paizo wasn't taking them seriously.

People who like the game are in fact more likely to make house rule adjustments because they *trust* the system...

Cantripgate is my go-to example when I point out the fact the people who complain about the community hating house rule changes and the people who then kneecap themselves by saying house ruling is not an excuse to dismiss bad changes are one in the same.