Pathfinder Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous Beta Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Cryomancer]

Combat is always better with limitations. Unless the limitations you're talking about are level 1-10 only. At that point you just went full Larian.

A lot of people here loved the limitation of lv cap = 10. Mainly balancefags/sawyer fans.

Games like Dark Sun : Shattered Lands and Temple of Elemental evil are good DESPITE the low lv cap, not because it.

Everyone considers BG2 > BG1.

 

[Lawntoilet]

Everyone considers BG2 > BG1.

Oh boy now you've done it
Paging Lilura

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

BG2 is most certainly not > BG1.

 

[Yosharian]

Yes because what this thread needs is a bunch of autists arguing over whether BG1 or BG2 is the better game.

Jesus fucking christ shut the fuck up about it already. Nobody cares which one you like best. We each have our own opinions about it, and everyone has pretty much heard all the arguments for and against each game before.

If you want to talk about that some MORE, go make another thread about it, instead of shitting up this one.

 

[Latro]

Only people afraid to discuss BG1 vs BG2 are those afraid of the truth.

 

[InD_ImaginE]

Only people afraid to discuss BG1 vs BG2 are those afraid of the truth.

Indeed. BG 2 is better than BG 1 in most ways. ToB was not that good tho. SoA > BG 1 is truth

 

[Cryomancer]

Yes because what this thread needs is a bunch of autists arguing over whether BG1 or BG2 is the better game.

You are right. I should't have said the last line.

But you got my point. Low level gameplay tends to be bandit/kobold slaying on villages. On RWTP is mostly autoattacks. Mid level on most settings and high level if you have a good DM, is where D&D/Pathfinder is great.

But 3.5e had his fair share of decline compared to 2e. Different classes no longer requiring different XP and Plate Armor providing the same AC vs a sword and a mace are two examples.

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

If you want to talk about that some MORE, go make another thread about it, instead of shitting up this one.

Shut the FUCK up, Yosharian. > : |

 

[Yosharian]

All aspects can be good, the problem is overpowered splat books and spellcasters not being reined in properly by the DM

In a videogame this is a moot point because the developers can choose what to bring into their game and how to implement it

 

[Cryomancer]

All aspects can be good, the problem is overpowered splat books and spellcasters not being reined in properly by the DM

In a videogame this is a moot point because the developers can choose what to bring into their game and how to implement it

A DM can ban certain spells. Is extremely common for banning create food/water on survival settings.

But about "how to implement it", i strongly disagree. Implementing things differently than P&P only leads to awful things that would be better if wasn't in the game. You see people complaining about persistent effects like Sirroco/Deadly Earth here on Pathfinder, but i rather having it over for eg, vanilla NWN2 where tentacles which has CL + 8 AB on P&P has a fix +5 AB on NWN2 and no grapple and most things that the mod spell fixes changes in the game are persistent effects. They are complete TRASH on vanilla game.

Things that are extremely nerfed on most adaptations, like persistent effects, rogues, bards, etc; are great on Pathfinder Kingmaker and should be great on Wrath of The righteous.

 

[Sharpedge]

Combat is always better with limitations. Unless the limitations you're talking about are level 1-10 only. At that point you just went full Larian.

A lot of people here loved the limitation of lv cap = 10. Mainly balancefags/sawyer fans.

Games like Dark Sun : Shattered Lands and Temple of Elemental evil are good DESPITE the low lv cap, not because it.

Everyone considers BG2 > BG1.

I am almost certain Larian level capped BG3 to 10 so they can make a BG4 which goes 11-20 and not because they only intended to do low level gameplay.

 

[Yosharian]

All aspects can be good, the problem is overpowered splat books and spellcasters not being reined in properly by the DM

In a videogame this is a moot point because the developers can choose what to bring into their game and how to implement it

A DM can ban certain spells. Is extremely common for banning create food/water on survival settings.

But about "how to implement it", i strongly disagree. Implementing things differently than P&P only leads to awful things that would be better if wasn't in the game. You see people complaining about persistent effects like Sirroco/Deadly Earth here on Pathfinder, but i rather having it over for eg, vanilla NWN2 where tentacles which has CL + 8 AB on P&P has a fix +5 AB on NWN2 and no grapple and most things that the mod spell fixes changes in the game are persistent effects. They are complete TRASH on vanilla game.

Things that are extremely nerfed on most adaptations, like persistent effects, rogues, bards, etc; are great on Pathfinder Kingmaker and should be great on Wrath of The righteous.

I mean Cloudkill is utterly broken in Kingmaker, that's one example

But I wasn't really advocating banning spells

 

[Cryomancer]

I mean Cloudkill is utterly broken in Kingmaker, that's one example

No, is not. Is exactly like on P&P. Except on RANGE which is far more limited.

Even on novels, i remember when i read a novel about Ravenloft where the Count trapped a army inside his perimeters and with a single cloudkill, killed most of the army, few of the enemies survived and the novel even described how everyone died. IF i find the novel name, i will post

 

[Yosharian]

I mean Cloudkill is utterly broken in Kingmaker, that's one example

No, is not. Is exactly like on P&P. Except on RANGE which is far more limited.

Even on novels, i remember when i read a novel about Ravenloft where the Count trapped a army inside his perimeters and with a single cloudkill, killed most of the army, few of the enemies survived and the novel even described how everyone died. IF i find the novel name, i will post

And are you required to 'trap' enemies in KM? Or do they just sit there in the cloud, dying like idiots?

 

[Cryomancer]

And are you required to 'trap' enemies in KM? Or do they just sit there in the cloud, dying like idiots?

AI problem, not spell problem. On novel, enemies droped their weapons and started to try desperate to climb the wall and mount one on another. The few who survived was feeling far weaker and less dispose(due CON damage).

 

[Desiderius]

Combat is always better with limitations. Unless the limitations you're talking about are level 1-10 only. At that point you just went full Larian.

A lot of people here loved the limitation of lv cap = 10. Mainly balancefags/sawyer fans.

Games like Dark Sun : Shattered Lands and Temple of Elemental evil are good DESPITE the low lv cap, not because it.

Everyone considers BG2 > BG1.

I remember being blown away by Dark Sun's interface.

 

[Sharpedge]

I mean Cloudkill is utterly broken in Kingmaker, that's one example

No, is not. Is exactly like on P&P. Except on RANGE which is far more limited.

Even on novels, i remember when i read a novel about Ravenloft where the Count trapped a army inside his perimeters and with a single cloudkill, killed most of the army, few of the enemies survived and the novel even described how everyone died. IF i find the novel name, i will post

I am not sure what your point is. Just because wizards are that way in a book doesn't mean it isn't "overpowered" in pnp either. Something can follow the rules exactly as written and still be objectively stronger than the alternatives. What I find odd is that you seem to be unable to acknowledge this. You want to play a powerful wizard that can bend reality and that is better than the mere mortal fighters who do silly things like swing swords. Thats fine, its the power fantasy you find fun. Other people don't want to play that particular power fantasy and like low magic settings, that's fine too. There is no reason for the person that enjoys the low magic setting to pretend the low magic setting features all powerful wizards and likewise there is no reason for you to pretend that the high magic setting is in any way balanced - its not trying to be balanced, the people who enjoy it are enjoying it for the lack of balance.

 

[Cryomancer]

I am not sure what your point is. Just because wizards are that way in a book doesn't mean it isn't "overpowered" in pnp either. Something can follow the rules exactly as written and still be objectively stronger than the alternatives. What I find odd is that you seem to be unable to acknowledge this. You want to play a powerful wizard that can bend reality and that is better than the mere mortal fighters who do silly things like swing swords. Thats fine, its the power fantasy you find fun. Other people don't want to play that particular power fantasy and like low magic settings, that's fine too. There is no reason for the person that enjoys the low magic setting to pretend the low magic setting features all powerful wizards and likewise there is no reason for you to pretend that the high magic setting is in any way balanced - its not trying to be balanced, the people who enjoy it are enjoying it for the lack of balance.

As i've said many times FUCK BALANCE!!! Go play 4e if you wanna a balanced and borin game. More balanced a game is, less variety, immersion and consequences will have. Imagine a FPS. If everyone is using M16, the game is 100% balanced, if you have a guy using a PzB 39, other using a Mini uzi, other using a musket, the game can't be balanced unless every weapon is just a resking of one to another.

Every classic RPG is extremely unbalanced. Arcanum? BG1/2? Dark Sun : Shattered Lands? ToEE? VtMB? Every single legendary RPG is unbalanced. Imagine if VTMB had made the curse of nosferatu far less impactful or removed the class for balance's sake. How it would made the game better? And if you look to kingmaker build thread, everyone suggests martial classes, so stop pretending that martial classes are trash on kingmaker.

And magicians can be quite powerful in low magical settings. See Conan's Thoth-Amon. What makes a setting a low magical setting is >

• The rarity of the magic
• The risks associated
• The costs associated

A sorcerer is extremely rare on Conan, most of his magics are ritualistic and often come with high cost. But are quite powerful. And D&D/Pathfinder are high magical setting with some ultra high magical adventures like Netheril. If you don't like, there are other ultra balanced games to play but how many RPG's with a consistency on lore and mechanics we have?

--------------------------------------

If the spell does X on a novel, it should does X on a game. That is simple. We don't need more games where necromancers and unarmed monks needs bigger and sharper axes to have powerful undead servants or melee strikes like D3 for the sake of balance.

 

[Pink Eye]

No. Mercs suck. Period. In terms of optimization, Companions do it better. Save for special cases like Amiri who is restricted to her iconic point buy. Everyone else has a higher point buy than what mercs can achieve. Companions can further increase their stats via completion of personal quests. Companions can gain access to unique passives or unique items later in the game.

This isn't always true and, even if it was, it would mean nothing. Kingmaker has endless party compositions to try and, for some of them, mercenaries are the way to go. Maybe you want a Dexterity focused melee Alchemist, maybe you want a Druid without any level in another class, maybe you want a ranged Paladin, maybe you want a Sorcerer without a slower spell progression due to multiclassing, maybe you want a Sorcerer/Paladin/Monk/Eldritch Knight and even a single level lost to another class would mean delaying your already slow build even longer. There are reasons to rely on mercenaries, even if companions use an higher point buy and better stats.

>even if it was, it would mean nothing
>nothing
No, it means a great deal to me. It means I can still have fun with my favorite companions by trying out different classes with them. Right now I'm having fun with my favorite companion, Jaethal. She is a Spawn Slayer in my Iron Man run and I'm loving it!

She is able to hold the front line while also being able to deal devastating damage when it matters! I get to hear her banter during camp time and when adventuring. I get to also experience her story line again for the 10000th time! She's the coolest!

Valerie, she's configured to be a support in this iron man run, by singing songs and supporting allies with buffs. But when it comes to damage watch out! She can also do that too! She wields a huge composite longbow and isn't afraid to protect her allies! I get to also experience her story line for the 10000th time as well! What's there to dislike?

I understand people are not going to like the companions. That's fine. It won't impact me. Just as how it doesn't impact me when people say they don't like Kingmaker. What DOES impact me, is when people go around telling others that mercs are somehow better than the companions. Which gives noobs the wrong impression. Countless community members within the Pathfinder community have documented several strong builds for companions. I don't need to be no damned Ineffect to tell you that some of the companions are stronger than what you an do with mercs.

 

[Sharpedge]

I am not sure what your point is. Just because wizards are that way in a book doesn't mean it isn't "overpowered" in pnp either. Something can follow the rules exactly as written and still be objectively stronger than the alternatives. What I find odd is that you seem to be unable to acknowledge this. You want to play a powerful wizard that can bend reality and that is better than the mere mortal fighters who do silly things like swing swords. Thats fine, its the power fantasy you find fun. Other people don't want to play that particular power fantasy and like low magic settings, that's fine too. There is no reason for the person that enjoys the low magic setting to pretend the low magic setting features all powerful wizards and likewise there is no reason for you to pretend that the high magic setting is in any way balanced - its not trying to be balanced, the people who enjoy it are enjoying it for the lack of balance.

As i've said many times FUCK BALANCE!!! Go play 4e if you wanna a balanced and borin game. More balanced a game is, less variety, immersion and consequences will have. Imagine a FPS. If everyone is using M16, the game is 100% balanced, if you have a guy using a PzB 39, other using a Mini uzi, other using a musket, the game can't be balanced unless every weapon is just a resking of one to another.

Every classic RPG is extremely unbalanced. Arcanum? BG1/2? Dark Sun : Shattered Lands? ToEE? VtMB? Every single legendary RPG is unbalanced. Imagine if VTMB had made the curse of nosferatu far less impactful or removed the class for balance's sake. How it would made the game better? And if you look to kingmaker build thread, everyone suggests martial classes, so stop pretending that martial classes are trash on kingmaker.

And magicians can be quite powerful in low magical settings. See Conan's Thoth-Amon. What makes a setting a low magical setting is >

• The rarity of the magic
• The risks associated
• The costs associated

A sorcerer is extremely rare on Conan, most of his magics are ritualistic and often come with high cost. But are quite powerful. And D&D/Pathfinder are high magical setting with some ultra high magical adventures like Netheril. If you don't like, there are other ultra balanced games to play but how many RPG's with a consistency on lore and mechanics we have?

--------------------------------------

If the spell does X on a novel, it should does X on a game. That is simple. We don't need more games where necromancers and unarmed monks needs bigger and sharper axes to have powerful undead servants or melee strikes like D3 for the sake of balance.

I am not sure how you managed to take out of my post that all rpgs must be balanced, but ok. My post was more or less saying, "if you don't want a balanced game, don't pretend you do. You want a game where spellcasters are clearly the superior citizens of the world and the unfortunate people that can't do magic must live with that."

I will only add a short line on the subject of balance because it was not the purpose of my post - games can be balanced without everything being the same, easy example, rock, paper, scissors.

 

[Ninjerk]

BG2 is only considered superior by people who go for Aerie

 

[Cryomancer]

"if you don't want a balanced game, don't pretend you do.

I said on bald and with underline "fuck ballance" and said that one reason to why PoE 1 is extremely lackluster comapred to any IE game is the excessive focus on balance, so i an not pretending that i wanna a balanced game. This doesn't means that martial classes are weak.

My point is that arcane casters are nerfed into trash in many adaptations who tries to adapt TT games. Every arcane caster on DDO is trash(except warlock which is a payed class and nobody will ever play for a nerfed class), on NWN2 and so on. Until Kingmaker, the last game with decent spell casters in therms of following P&P rules was BG2. And when finally i can have my spells not destroyed by the devs, """"""balance cultists""""""" start to demand that WoTR has the same awful arcane spellcasting experience of nwn2. Why?

If you wanna every game to be a kobold slaying low level adventure or having trash spellcasters that only serves to cause frustration among the people who enjoy being spellcasters, don't pretend to defend another thing.

I wanna have the same amazing experience of infinity engine games and kingmaker.

You want a game where spellcasters are clearly the superior citizens of the world and the unfortunate people that can't do magic must live with that."

I will only add a short line on the subject of balance because it was not the purpose of my post - games can be balanced without everything being the same, easy example, rock, paper, scissors.

No, spellcasters AREN'T SUPERIOR, except in few Magocracies on Faerun(Netheril and Thay for eg), and on D&D everyone can learn magic and become a Wizard or even a Warlock. On Pathfinder, too. You need a lot of money and study but that is it.

And your example of rock paper and scissors is a awful example because they are mechanic the same. "A" always wins over "B" and loses to "C". There are no way to have variety, immersion and balance.

Is like accessibility and depth. You can't have both.

------------------------------------------

People who enjoy solving every problem, from a knight on plate armor to a iron golem with a fast swinging blade already has 652.64156415649 games to play. Why a single game being great to arcane fans is a bad thing? When the game is far easier to solo as a melee warrior(mainly on chapter 1)

 

[gurugeorge]

On the question of magics, I think the problem is that what you really want from magic isn't just a re-skinned longbow or flamethrower (i.e. something "balanced" against more mundane weapons), or effectively just a kind of superpower (i.e. a Sorcerer), but something that does in fact bend reality. "Proper" magic. But while it's possible to have that in PnP, it's quite a bit more difficult to implement in a CRPG where it has to be implemented graphically, in a linear representation.

When I think of "proper" magic, I think of Vancian magic as it is in Vance's books. Low-level spells like "Grease" are proper magic, and easily implementable in a videogame. But for example, how would you implement, "The Spell of Forlorn Encystment" in a videogame? (Your victim is instantly transported to a body-sized capsule forty miles under the surface of the earth).

Another thing is that with the idea of Vancian magic as originally intended in D&D, the thing that made it balanced, was that it involved these special, one-off "tricks" that were spectacular and could turn the tide of battle in a big way, but the limitation was you could cram only a limited number of them in your memory. (The lore aspect of this, not widely known, is lovely - it's the slightly Lovecraftian idea that the syllables of the spells are so insane, multi-angled and multidimensional that you need high intelligence to decipher/understand them, and a lot of training and experience to keep them in the memory; but the mind revolts against keeping them in memory, and is so relieved to discharge the spell that you instantly forget the spell once discharged.) So you had to pick and choose per encounter.

But if you can't scout out the lay of the land ahead of time in some way, or otherwise know what you're going to encounter, then it's difficult to prepare the right limited number of spells. So I think if you want that kind of "proper" magic, magic that's reality-bending and really powerful, but finicky enough not to be OP, then it has to be paired with some kind of "conning" or scouting system, or the knowledge of the forthcoming encounter has to be built into the story in some way, so that the magician can prepare (a few cantrips and general purpose low-level spells, and one or two "big" spells that are encounter-appropriate). Otherwise it makes no sense - or, for convenience' sake, it has to devolve to boring stuff like being able to throw fireballs (at which point you might as well be a superhero sorcerer and have boring crap like "mana" as a limitation).

(Another cool thing about Vancian magic as it is in his books, is that the magic effects are the result of the spell calling forth the power of otherworldly denizens who do have the power to do what you want - Vance called them "Sandestins", quirky multidimensional creatures of various kinds. They're the entities that do the actual magic, it's just that the spell gives you command over them. And that is in fact the traditional idea of magic in Western occultism, where you have sylphs, salamanders, demons, etc. who do your dirty work for you.)

 

[Cryomancer]

But while it's possible to have that in PnP, it's quite a bit more difficult to implement in a CRPG where it has to be implemented graphically, in a linear representation.

Yep. You are right. Wish on BG2 is extremely lackluster compared to P&P however, balance fags tends to hate everything who is unique to sorcerer/wizard. Like persistent effects, OHK spells and summons.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

men wearing dresses shouldn't be powerful