Pathfinder Why Owlcat's Kingmaker Sucks, in Plain Language

[underground nymph]

Only thing I was playing pfkm because was decent dnd implementation. Nonetheless i couldn’t make it past 11 lvl because of overwhelming cringe. Its writing literally made me feel pain sometines.

 

[Absinthe]

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.

I can't help but notice that arguing with you isn't some "point -> counterpoint -> let's get into details" kinda thing but more a "point -> willfully misinterpret and rage -> point again -> misinterpret some more -> point again -> deflect and laugh" kinda retard shit.

Let me stick the point to you yet again: You don't need Fighters, at all. Mundane classes suck, because there is no fucking niche for them. The only thing they do, really, is hit shit, and you don't need them for that. Sure, if you're bad at the game and like watching numbers rise, you might think Fighters and the like are cool beans, but the truth is that spellcasters overwhelmingly tend to be better at taking care of shit than mundanes are while being useful in vastly more ways than they can be.

Pathfinder has shit balance. It's time you accepted that.

 

[Desiderius]

Let me stick the point to you again: You don't need fighters, at all. Mundane classes suck, because there is no fucking niche for them. The only thing they do, really, is hit shit, and you don't need them for that. Sure, if you're bad at the game and like watching numbers rise, you might think Fighters are cool beans, but the truth is that spellcasters overwhelmingly tend to be better at taking care of shit than Fighters are.

LOL.

With an avatar like that one, I can see why you'd avoid mirrors. Tragic.

The only details you've offered are pure, outdated theorycraft while I've not only presented details but in-game evidence.

You're going on ignore before you bore everyone to death. No class is needed (outside probably Bard). All classes have their niche, including the ones you haven't bothered to even explore let alone master due to your obsolete, and in the case of P:K absurd, prejudice against them.

I've been demonstrating for a year how martials can not only fill a niche but indeed dominate (hat tip to Haplo there). You've... done nothing but repeat hackneyed cliches.

Bye

 

[Absinthe]

Yep, that's precisely the kind of self-absorbed cowardice I expected from you, Desiderius.

You completely ignored all the points about power imbalance, lack of versatility, lack of niche, and how other classes can shit all over them with just a class feature. All you can do is fanboy hard about how your Fighter at least does damage and make up nonsensical accusations that I must not know how to play a martial. It seems your mind is incapable of comprehending that the ability of the Fighter to do damage is not even the point. The point is that the Fighter can't do fuck-all except damage and even in that capacity he is easily overshadowed or obviated.

 

[Xamenos]

"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.

"DM doing his job" = "inventing bulshit in-game consequences". Thank you for making my point for me, again. Couldn't have done it better myself.

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

How convenient. Now that there's proof, will you finally admit you've been talking out of your ass?

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.

I know you'd like to think reading a guide on the internet makes you smart, but it's far from true. And yes, it's easy to break the game when theorycrafting in a forum. But it's miraculously not much of a problem when you're actually in a table with a DM that actually does what he's meant to do.

I can't help but notice that arguing with you isn't some "point -> counterpoint -> let's get into details" kinda thing but more a "point -> willfully misinterpret and rage -> point again -> misinterpret some more -> point again -> deflect and laugh" kinda retard shit.

I've seen precious little details from you, my friend. Details that weren't entirely wrong, at least. Plenty of misinterpreting as well. Curious how the last resort of the retarded is to always accuse the other party of the same shit they're guilty of.

And by "curious" I mean "predictable".

 

[LannTheStupid]

Don't mix absinthe and reddit, guys.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Locking conversation choices behind allignment. Is this a good idea? I don't have the option to broker peace between the kobolds and the mites because my char is not neutral. I play lawful evil. How would striking the deal oppose it in any way? Man this really sucks. Kinda makes me not want to continue.

For the same reasons your single class fighter cannot cast arcane spells without having levels in the wizard class. The choice and its effects are considered significant enough to where they are outside the scope of the character attributes you chose. It's not different than any other arbitrary design features of the RPG mechanics. When dealing with something as simplistic as D&D alignment axis, the notion that a LE character would broker peace between to groups of monsters to remove them as obstructions is a stretch. That that point the player doesn't yet have a barony--so the idea to ultimately impress them both as vassals is a thin argument. Locking certain major choices on alignment is entirely valid.

 

[Shadenuat]

It's all quite ironic considering Steam forums are mostly "casters bad" and "can't land fireballs in rtwp".

 

[Shitty Kitty]

Locking conversation choices behind allignment. Is this a good idea? I don't have the option to broker peace between the kobolds and the mites because my char is not neutral. I play lawful evil. How would striking the deal oppose it in any way? Man this really sucks. Kinda makes me not want to continue.

For the same reasons your single class fighter cannot cast arcane spells without having levels in the wizard class. The choice and its effects are considered significant enough to where they are outside the scope of the character attributes you chose. It's not different than any other arbitrary design features of the RPG mechanics. When dealing with something as simplistic as D&D alignment axis, the notion that a LE character would broker peace between to groups of monsters to remove them as obstructions is a stretch. That that point the player doesn't yet have a barony--so the idea to ultimately impress them both as vassals is a thin argument. Locking certain major choices on alignment is entirely valid.

No it isn't. It implies that alignment takes precedence over absolutely everything else. Alignment has always been kludgy, overbroad and/or open to retarded and subjective interpretation, and you want to anchor a character's decision-making to that clusterfuck? People change their damn minds all the time, or engage in lateral thinking, or decide that goals take precedence over dogma. A LE in particular would gravitate towards a solution that results in less chaos and idiotic shitflinging, removes unnecessary variables and sets himself up to possibly consolidate power and manipulate other beings. Broker peace between them to keep them from fucking up your plans inadvertently, and if one side or another starts to become too much of a pain in the ass under the peace agreement engineer a situation where it looks like they're breaking the agreement so you have carte blanche to wipe them off the face of the planet WITH THE BACKING OF THEIR FORMER OPPONENTS. Intelligent and methodical evil is going to occasionally come bearing an olive branch because you can get some crazy shit done under peaceful conditions. He's not ideologically committed to peace or anything.

 

[Shadenuat]

Out of the box regular Fighter is probably the least interesting one (but then Aldori already spices things up). You can make him work tho. Paladin imo lacks in spells. But Barbarian, Ranger, Rogue, Monk & Slayer? Are all solid out of the box interesting classes, kits, and multis.

I can't say other similar games (and Deadfire tried with its mmo rotate abilities on cooldowns) made single class Ranger or Rogue feel so solid like PKM.

 

[Shadenuat]

Oh and I also think PKM is one of the rare D&D games that handled alignment great. Loved that you had to be both good and lawful (which means sometimes be cruel) as Paladin or could fall (too bad for scrolls for casuals). Should have added "take no rewards" from Icewind Dale for Paladins too to completely make casuals go nuts and rageuninstall.exe. First game where I got real good philosoraptor Lawful Neutral options. Fun to be evil. Fun to send noble back in the bawx to his master as Chaotic, etc. Secret harem ending for Neutral Goods (and, for tiefling girls, for Neutrals). Good stuff.

Not great but just like timers, it's a coin flip - 50% players like it 50% hate it. I was pleased. And I am DM for 20200 years which means my opinion is most important even if I can't remember how ac stacks.

 

[Absinthe]

"DM doing his job" = "inventing bulshit in-game consequences". Thank you for making my point for me, again. Couldn't have done it better myself.

Stop with the selective reading, son. That's not how you win an argument. That's how you demonstrate your ability to act like a child. DM inventing bullshit consequences is when you do something like have your Wizard craft magic items during a campaign and your DM responds by mysteriously throwing tons of random encounters at you that only seem to happen when you try to craft anything. When your GM wants to you figure out away across a broken bridge and your Wizard decides to cast flight only to suddenly get nailed by hitherto invisible giant birds and insects from the sky that are content to leave everyone who is on land alone but will brutally murder the Wizard because he tried to fly past the DM's clever puzzle. There are plenty of times when bad DMs do weird passive-aggressive stuff where they blatantly don't like something you're doing and consider it an "elegant" solution to ass-pull over-the-top and suspiciously selective "consequences" instead.

How convenient. Now that there's proof, will you finally admit you've been talking out of your ass?

Proof of what? You think this disproves the fact that animal companions can dominate at the Fighter's role for you? It doesn't.

I know you'd like to think reading a guide on the internet makes you smart, but it's far from true. And yes, it's easy to break the game when theorycrafting in a forum. But it's miraculously not much of a problem when you're actually in a table with a DM that actually does what he's meant to do.

Ah cute, the old "my anecdotal evidence totally disproves the presence of balance issues in the game" argument. We're talking Pathfinder, yes? Dazing spell metamagic shits on PF with a vengeance. Authoritative spell metamagic shits on PF with a vengeance. Simulacrum shits on PF with a vengeance. Animate dead and undead creation spells shit on PF with a vengeance. No-save tactics of escalating fear conditions to no-save frighten enemies shits on PF with a vengeance. Using fabricate to break the economy shits on PF with a vengeance. Just getting clever with illusions can shit on a lot of PF content with a vengeance. The Color Spray Oracle shits on PF with a vengeance until high levels (although if you go out of your way to pump your charisma score, you can still end fights with Color Spray at level 15 or so). Planar Ally/Binding/etc spells shit on PF with a vengeance. Summon monster/nature's ally spells, especially when optimized, shit on PF with a vengeance. Dominate Person abuse shits on PF with a vengeance. Spamming divinations all day for multiple days to interrogate your DM for everything you want to know about the campaign shits on PF with a vengeance. Just abusing teleportation can completely fuck a lot of things too. Save or lose effects shit on PF with a vengeance too. This is not even any tricky "rules interpretation" bullshit going on. Just straightforward ownage because your shit's overpowered as fuck. And it is very easy to have multiple tricks up your sleeves at the same time (absolutely nothing is stopping a Color Spray Oracle from also being a Summon Monster and animate dead abuser that also knows one or two divinations to spam silly, for instance). Just a Druid deciding to earth glide past a dungeon and collapse the way behind the party and abuse Wild Shape in all the various ways that are possible can shit on PF with a vengeance. And that's not even including the fact that there are tons of spells for social situations and treasure hunts and whatever the fuck that the mundane types get virtually nothing to compete in.

But please, do go on about how there are no issues with PF and the game is totally balanced. Please.

I've seen precious little details from you, my friend. Details that weren't entirely wrong, at least. Plenty of misinterpreting as well. Curious how the last resort of the retarded is to always accuse the other party of the same shit they're guilty of.

And by "curious" I mean "predictable".

Oh boy, a list of suspiciously vague accusations, what a surprise. Do go on about what points I've gotten "entirely wrong" or misinterpreted so horribly. Give the specifics. Name 'em, son. Somehow I suspect you're not going to manage it, though.

I've made my position clear and no one here has done fuck-all to disprove it. At most I've seen a nitpick on whether animal companions can equip items in the computer game. You seem to have a different take, so let's have it. Give the details, pal. I doubt you can.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Let me stick the point to you yet again: You don't need Fighters, at all. Mundane classes suck, because there is no fucking niche for them. The only thing they do, really, is hit shit, and you don't need them for that. Sure, if you're bad at the game and like watching numbers rise, you might think Fighters and the like are cool beans, but the truth is that spellcasters overwhelmingly tend to be better at taking care of shit than mundanes are while being useful in vastly more ways than they can be.

Pathfinder has shit balance. It's time you accepted that.

As a caster supremcist myself, I'd have to respectfully disagree in PF:KM. Everything about the game plays to the strengths of fighters.

1. Attrition (time restrictions, lots of travel, long adventuring days, lots of combat)
2. Powerful loot that is lavished on the player--particularly attribute and skill increasing items.
3. Rare spellcaster threats of no significant note. Furthermore, poor AI.
4. Ample consumables of every kind also lavished on the player.
5. Hordes of large HP laden monsters with considerable stats, many with immunities (like Wisps).
6. Well supported CMD and Teamwork Feats
7. Poor defensive spell list for arcane spell casters
8. Lots and lots of money available

All of these not only favor martial characters, but are detrimental to spell casters. My first party had not one full BAB class. I'm very good at RPGs--particularly D&D based. It's the first game since the the original Baldur's Gate that I have used consumables. They were an important part of making my squishy party last. Even then I had to lean very heavily on my Kineticst for awhile. While metagame knowledge definitely impacts my performance, my second play through with a melee oriented party takes 1/3 the effort and 1/3 the time. My party melts through encounters. CC isn't typically needed so much as buffs. I typically favor CC, but KM has different challenges. What little you do need can very readily be handled by your fighters with dirty trick/trip/disarm/menace feats. Add things like Slayer's Studied Target and Freebooter's Bane, and casters truly become a far secondary role.

The amount of ground I've covered is breath taking. I'm 80 days from the first ancient curse, and I've claimed every region and cleared all but one or two areas. Smiths are already upgraded to tier 2, I've just unlocked Curator and am one rank-up away from unlocking Magister and Dipolmat each. I will have teleport circles everywhere and blanket poison immunity in my lands well within the remainder of those 80 days. I would examine the game more closely if I were you.

 

[Shadenuat]

Also animal companions outfighting well built martials is a joke. On high difficulty against high level monsters difference is astronomical. Maybe if you run 6 pet chars with 6 pets and prebuff before every fight, sure, but that is one kind of degenerate gameplay which also would probably collapse on first gold golem. Not to mention it's shit tactico for dungeons with corridors. A stock Amiri with giant fucku stick would do more single target damage than this (and with 6 times less boring buff management).

also what ^that prestigious caster gentleperson said all fair points

 

[Desiderius]

Once they added the Advanced Weapon Training for Fighters in the Depths DLC Fighter became one of the best base classes since unlike the archetypes it gets both weapon and armor training. Weapon training is great because it allows you to use Duelist Gloves at lvl 5 and start the Advanced Weapon Training at lvl 9. Armor Training lets you get the full benefit out of Heavy Armor in a way no non-Fighter can since boosting DEX is so easy. The Advanced stuff fills the holes in the class so well it plays like a well-oiled machine. You end up with higher raw initiative than anyone but Inq and Sword Saint.

In P:K Feats are the second most valuable commodity behind levels and Fighter gets the most.

I prefer DEX-based Aldori Defender/Swordlord since it does less damage (you're resilient enough not to care) so fights last long enough for some fun tactical play. Disarm is so fun since mobs try to attack unarmed (and untrained) triggering mass AoOs. Base Fighter is definitely more raw power though.

 

[Desiderius]

Pets are fine. The buffs are long lasting so don't end up eating that much time, but you're pretty much priced into Alchemist.

No access to Blindfight eventually becomes an issue. Main thing is that they are auto-attacking most of the time since you can't pick feats and they can't wear equipment to customize them.

 

[Shadenuat]

Stop with the selective reading

You're in a pc game thread, a combat game, and built some strawman based on pnp version of the game retarded Cael-style. Stop this you're drunk. People literally posted screenshots disproving your bullshit. Go on paizoreddit or something.

(And even if we argue pnp, fact that Pathfinder sacrifices balance in favour of options is no worse than Path of Exile doing the same. It's for a specific goal - to be fun, and it achieves it.)

 

[Ol' Willy]

Feats are the second most valuable commodity behind levels

hmm...

This reminds me of one other Slavic RPG, can't quite recall its name...

Is it a new tendency in good RPGs?

 

[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

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.

Exhaustion is underwhelming on its own, but it's better since the spell also knocks things prone and exhaustion lowers their save to that too, so you end up with stuff getting up to immediately fall back over again. There's obviously better options available but it's easy to capitalize on and works on pretty much everything that's not a spider, so I assume that's why people like it.

Friendly fire's an issue, of course, but that's spellcasting for you I guess.

 

[Desiderius]

Friendly fire's an issue, of course, but that's spellcasting for you I guess.

Not if you manage your Kingdom right.

 

[Desiderius]

Here's a good illustration of why martials often (but not always) have an advantage in P:K

My MC Grenadier did beat that Fort save with a DC 34 Blinding Bomb, but you might as well just beat ass.

Spammed summons here because you always recharge your spells after Hilltop since you've just removed all time pressure.

 

[Absinthe]

Mr. Magniloquent, you actually make some solid points yourself, but let me point out some stuff here as well. Attrition is a very valid argument, but you're not obligated to always cast your highest level of spells so this issue tends to be much smaller at higher levels. Spellcasters can also still make strong use of a lot of stat-boosting gear. That's not an exclusive perk to martials, although it does help them. Poor AI can be circumvented by manually controlling the whole party (that's my standard preference and a major factor in why I cakewalk these kinds of games). Consumables do help martials buff themselves without spellcaster support, sure, although not needing to use consumables leaves you with more gold (for whatever that's worth). You mention Wisps as a threat that negates spellcasters, but you've got it completely backwards. Spellcasters negate Wisps. Cast Resist Energy on your party and Wisps do nothing. Resist Energy has a massive duration anyhow and you can even throw a lesser extend metamagic rod on top if you want. The right buffs make a lot of fights completely one-sided. Wizards can also shapeshift into monsters themselves (although this requires some build support to be good) and summon meatshields and whatnot. Lategame a Grandmaster's Rod lets you cast some shit on enemies with spell immunity too. Teamwork feats are good but it's not like Wizards are lacking for decent feat options themselves and Kingmaker also has problems with feats like Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, and Improved Critical making a fool of you because that better weapon you found wasn't the thing you invested feats in. Having lots of money also means you can buy items to boost spell DCs and quicken metamagic rods among other things.

Furthermore, there are plenty of casters (like Clerics, Druids, Inquisitors, Magi, Vivisectionist Alchemists, etc.) that can be played as martials themselves and do a better job at it than those pure martial classes do. And pumping animal companions typically means sticking 1 Bard in the party for the bonuses and casting shit like Divine Favor, Heroism, Haste, Greater Invisibility, or some kind of polymorph on them. They don't need to out-fight the martial classes (although they do that pretty fucking well in PnP). They just need to cover the slot and make the entire class unneeded, which they do. Sylvan Sorcerers casting polymorphs on their animal companion can get pretty strong though.

You also missed a more basic argument: Kingmaker being a combat-focused game, a lot of the crazy shit spellcasters do out-of-combat is completely infeasible here.

You're in a pc game thread, a combat game, and built some strawman based on pnp version of the game retarded Cael-style.

No man. I started the argument pointing out Kingdom Building rules are Paizo's invention, not Owlcat's, and that Paizo is fucking fail at design and Desiderius immediately dragged me into an argument because it made him mad or shit because he jumps the gun like that. I thought we were arguing about the PnP rule system (I was talking about Paizo, after all, not Owlcat). He was apparently arguing about the cRPG. Eventually this morphed into some weird-ass argument on the cRPG but sure, I'll make a case that spellcasters > noncasters in the cRPG I guess. The argument just started off weird.

Stop this you're drunk. People literally posted screenshots disproving your bullshit. Go on paizoreddit or something.

I don't use either of those sites, dude. And the only screenshots disproving my bullshit was Desiderius masturbating to damage numbers from crits.

(And even if we argue pnp, fact that Pathfinder sacrifices balance in favour of options is no worse than Path of Exile doing the same. It's for a specific goal - to be fun, and it achieves it.)

Path of Exile honestly suffered a lot for the way you can go wild with a massive pool of options. It's why PoE sucks balls at tactical combat and has to do health sponge bosses with retardedly powerful attack patterns while people find more ways to try to kill shit in 1 second. You do realize that there is a reason why PoE is all about clearspeed meta autism, right? It's because there are too many ways to stomp combat and move around quickly, making it hard to make challenges where people have to position carefully and use a variety of solutions. PoE is all about the godskill and grinding loot as fast as possible because the challenge is assumed to be a non-factor outside of maybe boss-fights (which is indeed the case) and even those tend to get obliterated very easily by the right builds. People started playing SSF because PoE was too damn easy when you can trade for items. Still, that's a conversation for a different thread.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Locking conversation choices behind allignment. Is this a good idea? I don't have the option to broker peace between the kobolds and the mites because my char is not neutral. I play lawful evil. How would striking the deal oppose it in any way? Man this really sucks. Kinda makes me not want to continue.

For the same reasons your single class fighter cannot cast arcane spells without having levels in the wizard class. The choice and its effects are considered significant enough to where they are outside the scope of the character attributes you chose. It's not different than any other arbitrary design features of the RPG mechanics. When dealing with something as simplistic as D&D alignment axis, the notion that a LE character would broker peace between to groups of monsters to remove them as obstructions is a stretch. That that point the player doesn't yet have a barony--so the idea to ultimately impress them both as vassals is a thin argument. Locking certain major choices on alignment is entirely valid.

No it isn't. It implies that alignment takes precedence over absolutely everything else. Alignment has always been kludgy, overbroad and/or open to retarded and subjective interpretation, and you want to anchor a character's decision-making to that clusterfuck? People change their damn minds all the time, or engage in lateral thinking, or decide that goals take precedence over dogma. A LE in particular would gravitate towards a solution that results in less chaos and idiotic shitflinging, removes unnecessary variables and sets himself up to possibly consolidate power and manipulate other beings. Broker peace between them to keep them from fucking up your plans inadvertently, and if one side or another starts to become too much of a pain in the ass under the peace agreement engineer a situation where it looks like they're breaking the agreement so you have carte blanche to wipe them off the face of the planet WITH THE BACKING OF THEIR FORMER OPPONENTS. Intelligent and methodical evil is going to occasionally come bearing an olive branch because you can get some crazy shit done under peaceful conditions. He's not ideologically committed to peace or anything.

Nice essay. PF:KM doesn't stand for Pathfinder: Kobold & Mite accords. The feuding monster tribes is a footnote in the immediate objective of the broader goal. The area already receives a lot of attention as it is. I think you're expecting a lot. Within the frame work of D&D alignment scheme, their solutions provided are appropriate. At face value, evil alignments are not going to be notable for broker peace treaties between monsters on the spur of the moment in the same way the LG option for this impasse is "I'll kill all of you horrid beasts!". Good character aren't going to brook monsters. Evil character aren't going to foster peace--especially in the heat of the moment. If these maxims are too much for you, there are a few threads around here where you can go rant about the alignment axis convention.

 

[Shadenuat]

let me point out some stuff here as well

you're not obligated to always cast your highest level of spells so this issue tends to be much smaller at higher levels
low level spells aren't hot on beating DCs, which is why Heighten spell is most common thing you use

Spellcasters can also still make strong use of a lot of stat-boosting gear
they can get more DC, get some cheesy rods. martials multiply weapons they gain to get absurd amounts of sustained damage, and that's just the basics.

You mention Wisps as a threat that negates spellcasters, but you've got it completely backwards. Spellcasters negate Wisps
you mean a single scroll bought negates wisps. it's even a better deal since you can memorise more damage spells or whatever.
compared to BG/IE games this game is trivial at replacing casters. almost everything is replaceable here. there are no mage duels. swarms are only thing maybe going for fireballs. at the same time, amount of monsters where you really need to hit with big stick and die easy to big stick is 99%.
money, mostly spend on boring kingdom building you dont' like and buying some hot stuff.
you run around with 99 scrolls of <protection from everything> and 99 scrolls of <heal All>.

Wizards can also shapeshift into monsters themselves
all these spells are more or less shit without particular loltroll trip octavia builds or whatever. close to useless on pure caster. on the other hand, martials/hybrids/tanks can actually make it good.
enchant is meh
divination garbo
abjuration literally has no place in game except for some protections a Cleric can cast.

game of caster supremacy? please.

Teamwork feats are good but it's not like Wizards are lacking for decent feat options
like spell focus and spell focus 2?
spellcaster feats are very mediocre, and I played all of em. literally played every caster specialist except Diviner lmao. you basically take a bunch of spell foci and an metamagic of your choice to micromanage your spellbook and fap furiously on moar DC. martials have way more interesting feat trees by far. hell I'd say squeezing extra damage from martial is more interesting BECAUSE the ceiling is that much HIGHER.

Furthermore, there are plenty of casters (like Clerics, Druids, Inquisitors, Magi, Vivisectionist Alchemists, etc.) that can be played as martials themselves
magi and vivi is only ones which do not die. druid can tank but can't do any damage in melee.

No man. I started the argument pointing out Kingdom Building rules are Paizo's invention, not Owlcat's, and that Paizo is fucking fail at design and Desiderius immediately dragged me into an argument because it made him mad or shit because he jumps the gun like that. I thought we were arguing about the PnP rule system (I was talking about Paizo, after all, not Owlcat). He was apparently arguing about the cRPG.
ha, should have known better.
now you argue that wizords arebroken cause they can ruin plot with divination.

And the only screenshots disproving my bullshit was Desiderius masturbating to damage numbers from crits.
and what's wrong with that? if martial can fucking 1 round 1600 hp mob casually while I as a wizord need very specific set of actions and build and elemental pick and preferably TB mod it proves his point?

(important: I actually like this. playing casters should be harder, magic is for prestigious people. as Ursula Le Guin wrote: a true wizard is only one who was born a wizard.)

Path of Exile honestly suffered a lot for the way you can go wild with a massive pool of options. It's why PoE sucks balls at tactical combat
it's a single char action rpg. but whatever, PoE is for PoE thread.

 

[Shitty Kitty]

Nice essay. PF:KM doesn't stand for Pathfinder: Kobold & Mite accords. The feuding monster tribes is a footnote in the immediate objective of the broader goal. The area already receives a lot of attention as it is. I think you're expecting a lot. Within the frame work of D&D alignment scheme, their solutions provided are appropriate. At face value, evil alignments are not going to be notable for broker peace treaties between monsters on the spur of the moment in the same way the LG option for this impasse is "I'll kill all of you horrid beasts!". Good character aren't going to brook monsters. Evil character aren't going to foster peace--especially in the heat of the moment. If these maxims are too much for you, there are a few threads around here where you can go rant about the alignment axis convention.

"PF:K makes LG AND LE into Lawful Stupid. Here's why that's a GOOD thing."