Pathfinder Why Owlcat's Kingmaker Sucks, in Plain Language

[Xamenos]

So, so tired of PnPers talking out of their ass on shit they have no idea about. Lucky crit, right, now do the 500 other damage. Don’t make me get out the NJClaw pics.

I can read the d20. It’s a great game. If you find certain shit unbalancing just don’t use it. Almost everything I thought was unbalancing ends up to have downsides. Even the most obvious persistent AoE ends up taking a good bit of kiting and what not that a good group doesn’t have to mess with.

#NotAllPnPers. I am one and I can tell you that, while PF is far from perfect, 90% of the complaints are the fault of a DM who is either retarded or overly permissive. Most of these "balance issues" can easily be dealt with if you just have enemies that behave intelligently instead of acting like braindead computer-controlled mobs and a world that reacts appropriately to the party's actions instead working like Diablo. The rest can be squashed if you, as the DM, are just not afraid to say no and/or direct the idiots to reread the rule they're trying to exploit.

Open map and press I while hovering the animal companion.

Post a screenshot. I'm half-convinced you've never even played the game and are just copying stupid thing you read on reddit.

I pointed out spellcasters shit all over martials, and you've been asspained since.

This has been common wisdom in DnD forums for at least a couple decades. It wasn't true then, and it's not true now. It's all just stupid nerds masturbating each other online over shit that would never fly in a real game with a competent DM.

 

[NJClaw]

Absinthe, half the reasons why casters are overpowered don't really apply to Kingmaker, or to videogame adaptations of D&D in general. CRPGs have a much narrower scope than actual PnP campaigns, and spellcasters can't use their spells in creative ways.

More fun to use? Probably, since casters generally have more "moves" and "actions" at their disposal. Stronger? No, because, as Desiderius loves to point out, Kingmaker is a videogame based on party compositions and on interactions between characters, so the value that each class brings to the table is higher than its inherent abilities. In this game (especially at higher difficulties), you have to hit things to win, and a group with a Fighter and a Wizard is better at hitting things than a group with two Wizards, despite the inherent value of each class.

 

[NJClaw]

Open map and press I while hovering the animal companion.

This is what I get:

 

[Shitty Kitty]

Absinthe, half the reasons why casters are overpowered don't really apply to Kingmaker, or to videogame adaptations of D&D in general. CRPGs have a much narrower scope than actual PnP campaigns, and spellcasters can't use their spells in creative ways.

More fun to use? Probably, since casters generally have more "moves" and "actions" at their disposal. Stronger? No, because, as Desiderius loves to point out, Kingmaker is a videogame based on party compositions and on interactions between characters, so the value that each class brings to the table is higher than its inherent abilities. In this game (especially at higher difficulties), you have to hit things to win, and a group with a Fighter and a Wizard is better at hitting things than a group with two Wizards, despite the inherent value of each class.

Even within the constraints of CRPGs casters have a sharper power curve than martials simply because while a martial can potentially do a lot of damage with sufficient charop most casters don't even need to do damage. Reducing HP to -10 is way less efficient than "force a high-DC saving throw or CEASE TO EXIST". A martial can possibly even one-shot some enemies, but the caster can force every enemy in the area to save or die with some spells.

 

[Desiderius]

Dumbass, if you're going to put words in my mouth and then waste your time attacking them, there are better ways for you to play with yourself. I pointed out spellcasters shit on non-casters with a vengeance (which is true) and the only thing your deficient fanboy mind can do is get all buttflustered and defensive about martials totally being good and start projecting that this must be a complaint that martials are too hard to play somehow. You're just being a retard swinging at air. What I'm pointing out is that they operate overwhelmingly as auto-attack dummies, have no fucking niche, and are easily replaced by fucking class features on better classes. I also pointed out that spellcasters tend to make better martials than the fucking martial classes.

Sorry, is this better "hurr, durr, I suck at martials because all I know how to do is autoattack, casters rule"?

If I said martials were better because all I do on my casters is spam cantrips, and then tried to swing my micropeen around like I was owning everybody would you be impressed?

Seriously, can you even hear yourself?

We all know there are drawbacks to P:K, we've discussed them and disagreed about them, some are even getting fixed in WotR. What we don't do is take seriously criticism from people who suck at the game and brag about it, then blame the game.

What even is that?

 

[NJClaw]

Even within the constraints of CRPGs casters have a sharper power curve than martials simply because while a martial can potentially do a lot of damage with sufficient charop most casters don't even need to do damage. Reducing HP to -10 is way less efficient than "force a high-DC saving throw or CEASE TO EXIST". A martial can possibly even one-shot some enemies, but the caster can force every enemy in the area to save or die with some spells.

Sure thing buddy, that must be why you can almost kill the last boss of the entire game with a Paladin in a single round.

Have you actually played the game? At what difficulty? The most efficient way to play the game is to CC enemies with a Sorcerer or a Bard, and then wreck them as quickly as possible with your "fighters". Definitely not to spam save-or-die or direct damage spells. On higher difficulties, it's far easier to stack attack bonuses to the point that enemies' AC becomes irrelevant, than to stack DC bonuses so that enemies won't always succeed their saves against your spells.

 

[LannTheStupid]

What even is that?

I think it's reddit's mini-raid.

 

[Desiderius]

Absinthe, half the reasons why casters are overpowered don't really apply to Kingmaker, or to videogame adaptations of D&D in general. CRPGs have a much narrower scope than actual PnP campaigns, and spellcasters can't use their spells in creative ways.

More fun to use? Probably, since casters generally have more "moves" and "actions" at their disposal. Stronger? No, because, as Desiderius loves to point out, Kingmaker is a videogame based on party compositions and on interactions between characters, so the value that each class brings to the table is higher than its inherent abilities. In this game (especially at higher difficulties), you have to hit things to win, and a group with a Fighter and a Wizard is better at hitting things than a group with two Wizards, despite the inherent value of each class.

Even within the constraints of CRPGs casters have a sharper power curve than martials simply because while a martial can potentially do a lot of damage with sufficient charop most casters don't even need to do damage. Reducing HP to -10 is way less efficient than "force a high-DC saving throw or CEASE TO EXIST". A martial can possibly even one-shot some enemies, but the caster can force every enemy in the area to save or die with some spells.

I'm the biggest buffer/debuffer there is, but at the end of the day big damage is CC and there are tools in P:K for martials to do that. The Fighters in P:K also have unique tools to be more resilient/consistent than other classes, along with some CC of their own through CMs that can be very good if you take the trouble to figure them out.

In addition on Unfair if you want to beat saves you need to build pretty narrowly and there end up being mobs that don't line up with your specialization, you end up resting more hurting your KM, and if you get unlucky on save rolls you're in more trouble than a well-built martial who gets unlucky on his.

 

[Xamenos]

Even within the constraints of CRPGs casters have a sharper power curve than martials simply because while a martial can potentially do a lot of damage with sufficient charop most casters don't even need to do damage. Reducing HP to -10 is way less efficient than "force a high-DC saving throw or CEASE TO EXIST". A martial can possibly even one-shot some enemies, but the caster can force every enemy in the area to save or die with some spells.

Thank you. I wouldn't be able to find a better example of the problems with all the "casters rules, martials drool" talk. You are assuming that the caster always has the correct spell prepared, that he never runs out of spells, and that his spells always succeed, while the fighter is a big dumb brute who never does anything more complicated than charge, swing with his sword, and miss.

 

[Desiderius]

Of course even Fighters can't compete with Rangers:

View attachment 14862

lol you're playing a girl

Technically that's NJClaw. When people requested testing or asked to get owned I repsecced them as a hot chick to do the deed.

Here's me playing a girl

 

[Desiderius]

That one's my favorite. Looks like my wife.

 

[Absinthe]

#NotAllPnPers. I am one and I can tell you that, while PF is far from perfect, 90% of the complaints are the fault of a DM who is either retarded or overly permissive. Most of these "balance issues" can easily be dealt with if you just have enemies that behave intelligently instead of acting like braindead computer-controlled mobs and a world that reacts appropriately to the party's actions instead working like Diablo. The rest can be squashed if you, as the DM, are just not afraid to say no and/or direct the idiots to reread the rule they're trying to exploit.

"The rules are fine so long as you have a DM who is willing to houserule problems, reject content, and invent bullshit in-game consequences for people taking advantage of the rules." That's the D&D attitude in a nutshell, alright. No son, if you had a better system, you wouldn't be off doing bs like that and treating it like it's a feature instead of the bug that it is.

Post a screenshot. I'm half-convinced you've never even played the game and are just copying stupid thing you read on reddit.

Seems to have gotten patched, see NJClaw's post below.

This has been common wisdom in DnD forums for at least a couple decades. It wasn't true then, and it's not true now. It's all just stupid nerds masturbating each other online over shit that would never fly in a real game with a competent DM.

I think you have parties that aren't as good at the game as you like to believe or DMs that go out of their way to try to punish/house-rule/block content that seems strong or otherwise aggressively rebalance the game on the fly and convinced yourself that's what a good ruleset looks like. You can break the game with fucking ease without trying any special rules bullshit. The fact that you are having trouble grasping this is only evidence of your sheer lack of experience with all the stupid shit that is possible in D&D.

Absinthe, half the reasons why casters are overpowered don't really apply to Kingmaker, or to videogame adaptations of D&D in general. CRPGs have a much narrower scope than actual PnP campaigns, and spellcasters can't use their spells in creative ways.

This much is true. Also computer game adaptations tend to run a higher number of encounters per day so spellcasters are less likely to have enough spells at all times.

More fun to use? Probably, since casters generally have more "moves" and "actions" at their disposal. Stronger? No, because, as Desiderius loves to point out, Kingmaker is a videogame based on party compositions and on interactions between characters, so the value that each class brings to the table is higher than its inherent abilities. In this game (especially at higher difficulties), you have to hit things to win, and a group with a Fighter and a Wizard is better at hitting things than a group with two Wizards, despite the inherent value of each class.

And yet a group with a Wizard and a Druid/Sylvan Sorcerer/Cleric/Inquisitor/Vivisectionist Alchemist/etc. will do better than the Wizard/Fighter duo. The double Wizard duo will still crush encounters with the right spells, mind you, as there are many spells that summon your own minions, disable enemies into uselessness, make them fight for you, remove them, etc. But yes, that build is a tad vulnerable at the lower levels before even that disadvantage disappears as they become straight retarded shit at the higher levels. But you went out of your way to pick Wizards, the one class where there is some measure of fragility for just picking more of them. If you had picked Clerics, Druids, Sylvan Sorcerers, even Alchemists, Bards, Inquisitors, and Magi, then obviously two of those would do better than one and a Fighter.

Sorry, is this better "hurr, durr, I suck at martials because all I know how to do is autoattack, casters rule"?

If I said martials were better because all I do on my casters is spam cantrips, and then tried to swing my micropeen around like I was owning everybody would you be impressed?

Seriously, can you even hear yourself?

We all know there are drawbacks to P:K, we've discussed them and disagreed about them, some are even getting fixed in WotR. What we don't do is take seriously criticism from people who suck at the game and brag about it, then blame the game.

What even is that?

Damn you're stupid. Points for persistence, I guess. Even when it's pointed out where you're wrong and you're quoting the exact text pointing it out, you still double down on your own stupidity like a child. Please give yourself a timeout in the corner and put on your dunce cap while you reflect for the next 15 minutes. Then come back once you actually understand how to properly read a text.

 

[NJClaw]

Since this is now a favorite custom portrait waifu thread:

 

[LannTheStupid]

So now the only melee class is a Fighter, and everyone who plays Regongar of Legendary Proportions with Vanquisher is actually playing a wizard.

OK.

 

[Shitty Kitty]

Even within the constraints of CRPGs casters have a sharper power curve than martials simply because while a martial can potentially do a lot of damage with sufficient charop most casters don't even need to do damage. Reducing HP to -10 is way less efficient than "force a high-DC saving throw or CEASE TO EXIST". A martial can possibly even one-shot some enemies, but the caster can force every enemy in the area to save or die with some spells.

Thank you. I wouldn't be able to find a better example of the problems with all the "casters rules, martials drool" talk. You are assuming that the caster always has the correct spell prepared, that he never runs out of spells, and that his spells always succeed, while the fighter is a big dumb brute who never does anything more complicated than charge, swing with his sword, and miss.

A caster that isn't properly prepared for an encounter is by definition a lousy caster. A wizard is easily able to add plenty of spells that target different saves (or don't allow saves at all, or don't allow SR, take your pick really), tack on feats that improve spell DCs, improve his ability to beat SR checks, and if he really damn well feels like it just pop something like Transformation or Polymorph and clobber things. He is only ever limited by the spellbook of the game he is in, and in every other game I've played that limitation was effectively null. A martial that encounters an enemy that doesn't give a damn about his ability to disarm, trip, crit or intimidate for one reason or another gets to stand there and do things the hard way. Sorcerer is a bit more sporting, he has to be really choosy with what he focuses on due to limited spell lists, but can still crank out some amazing shit especially if he's allowed to fuck with Metamagic. Cleric absolutely does not give a fuck, he can nearly match the Wizard's quantity of bullshit and tacks on armor proficiency, lack of ASF, and all the wonders of Turning/Rebuking plus whatever his domains give him access to. Druid is nearly as versatile as Cleric and sometimes moreso in the right environment.

If PF:K subverts this, it would be the FIRST GAME I'VE EVER PLAYED post-3.x that did so.

So now the only melee class is a Fighter, and everyone who plays Regongar of Legendary Proportions with Vanquisher is actually playing a wizard.

OK.

Well, let's look at Paladin. Fewer feats to blow on battlefield control, gets to hit REALLY HARD against the right kind of enemy a few times a day, gets a small spell list and a Turn ability that is less reliable than the Cleric's. It's telling that the Paladin's ability to cast spells alone elevates him above your average Fighter by a bit. Ranger is in a better spot for versatility historically due to being slightly less MAD and getting some extra goodies for combat and an animal companion to scout, flank and harass with. Monk is a joke. It has always been a joke. Barbarian is much better at cranking out insane damage than the Fighter but is less versatile, gets some neat tricks that let it hit harder, give it a bit more of an edge against typical Martial weaknesses like will saves (except the Paladin already has that mostly covered with Divine Grace), and with a bit of optimization will tank better than any of the above as long as he doesn't have to tank spell DCs. These guys are all great in the right fight and can occasionally go outside their comfort zones a bit. The full-caster's only real limitations when properly built are "Am I in an anti-magic field? No? TIME TO RAPE."

 

[LannTheStupid]

If PF:K subverts this

I see why those redditors are seeking refuge here. Even redditors are not allowed to diminish the game they have no idea about.

However, here, on Codex, we have true freedom of speech and discussion. Even destructive ones.

 

[NJClaw]

If PF:K subverts this, it would be the FIRST GAME I'VE EVER PLAYED post-3.x that did so.

So you haven't played the game. Okay.

 

[Desiderius]

PF:K subverts this, it would be the FIRST GAME I'VE EVER PLAYED post-3.x that did so.

That is exactly what it is, and why we love it.

Absinthe is too stuck inside his own obsolete priors to even be open to the possibility.

 

[Shitty Kitty]

If PF:K subverts this, it would be the FIRST GAME I'VE EVER PLAYED post-3.x that did so.

So you haven't played the game. Okay.

I haven't gotten to a point yet where I'm seeing the martials have a meaningful edge on the casters. They either all suck because I encountered a situation that I was not expecting or my Wizard levels are basically making the martials into extensions of the Wizard's will and nothing more.

 

[Desiderius]

Even when it's pointed out where you're wrong and you're quoting the exact text pointing it out, you still double down on your own stupidity like a child. Please give yourself a timeout in the corner and put on your dunce cap while you reflect for the next 15 minutes. Then come back once you actually understand how to properly read a text.

You keep pointing to shit that doesn't exist like a madman and somehow think you're convincing anyone of anything but your own unimaginative thick-headedness. You've pointed to nothing, I've provided exhaustive documentation.

 

[Desiderius]

If PF:K subverts this, it would be the FIRST GAME I'VE EVER PLAYED post-3.x that did so.

So you haven't played the game. Okay.

I haven't gotten to a point yet where I'm seeing the martials have a meaningful edge on the casters. They either all suck because I encountered a situation that I was not expecting or my Wizard levels are basically making the martials into extensions of the Wizard's will and nothing more.

You will. That's the fun of it.

 

[Absinthe]

Shitty Kitty, PF made Paladin spell-casting cha-based, so they're no longer as stupidly MAD. Considering how Divine Grace pumps their will saves, they can afford to just dump wis now. Usually you also dump int. There is also the Oath of Vengeance in PnP, which lets Paladins trade 2 Lay on Hands uses for extra smite evil uses, giving them massive amounts of daily smiting. But spellcasting is a major perk of the Paladin class, yes. It's not for nothing that all the Paladin archetypes that trade away spellcasting are considered utter shit.

Desiderius, I understand you're a fanboy, but I already pointed at how animal companions basically remove the need for any martials in the party if you even felt the pressure to have a martial in the party. I understand you're an awfully slow fellow when it comes to accepting things you don't want to, but it's past time that you accept that animal companions, for instance, do exist. Or that a Vivisectionist/Cleric/Druid/Inquisitor/Magus/whatever the fuck tends to make a better martial than the Fighter.

 

[bec de corbin]

All I'll say is that sirocco trivializes every fight you use it in, including the final boss, so wizards are pretty good if you want to just coast to victory

 

[Desiderius]

USER=26753]Desiderius[/USER], I understand you're a fanboy, but I already pointed at how animal companions basically remove the need for any martials in the party if you even felt the pressure to have a martial in the party. I understand you're an awfully slow fellow when it comes to accepting things you don't want to, but it's past time that you accept that animal companions, for instance, do exist. Or that a Vivisectionist/Cleric/Druid/Inquisitor/Magus/whatever the fuck tends to make a better martial than the Fighter.

I'm chuckling a bit seeing as how I've been convincing people of that very fact for the last year plus by tanking with Okbo.

It's not a tank and spank game though so I also run a big two-handed Freebooter Cleaver and some other melee (Aldori Defender/Swordlord is my favorite) MC plus a Cleric in melee. I've also played/tested groups without pets and the actual toon is much better than the pet, it's just that Okbo comes with Ekun attached.

I still don't understand how you can expound upon classes you haven't even played.

 

[Desiderius]

All I'll say is that sirocco trivializes every fight you use it in, including the final boss, so wizards are pretty good if you want to just coast to victory

I've heard that but I always have trouble staying out of it myself and/or setting up the fight to last long enough for it to do more than a mild debuff with some regular but unspectacular damage. Exhaustion is great and all but it's still just -3/-3.