Five things the Pathfinder message boards taught me that were wrong


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

451 to 462 of 462 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Anzyr wrote:
Grammar Nazi wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
I can literally taste the salt in this post.

>:(

I promise I'm not being figurative. Quite literal in fact. Try tasting it.

I licked my screen and tasted no salt, so I guess that makes you a liar. LIAR.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:
Grammar Nazi wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
I can literally taste the salt in this post.

>:(

I promise I'm not being figurative. Quite literal in fact. Try tasting it.

I could accept a claim that you literally tasted salt on your monitor, but not in the post.


Blackwaltzomega wrote:
Xexyz wrote:
Blackwaltzomega wrote:
"The Wizard/Sorcerer/Arcanist Spell List is sufficiently powerful that a sufficiently clever player with good system mastery can solve basically any problem the GM can come up with" is correct.
Which is the crux of why it's so obnoxious. Because on the boards when people invoke Schrodinger's Wizard what they're really doing is using it as a premise for bragging about how smart they are and how much system mastery they have, which gets annoying.

One could argue since Pathfinder inherited some of 3.5's Ivory Tower Game Design problems that this is a feature of the system, not a bug.

I'm merely saying, the Wizard and Arcanist own any theory-based discussion because theoretically speaking there is almost nothing in the game that the Wizard spell list cannot solve, so then discussion is entirely about the practical limitations on said theory and how much the Wizard can do to lift these limitations, which is often quite a bit more than most players think is fair.

And to be fair, people do brag about how their rogue totally one-shotted this dude this one time when he rolled a double-crit whilst two-weapon sneak attacking this guy and it was magical, you totally should have been there, too.

Charon's Little Helper wrote:
I actually don't have a problem with binding Efreeti for wishes - but the Efreeti should try to Monkey's Paw you as much as possible. Therefore - anything but the most simplistic wishes should backfire horribly. (I wouldn't trust them for much beyond inherent bonuses.)

"You wished for him to produce the expensive spell you needed, and he did it. You didn't wish for him to NOT turn you into a harem girl in semitransparent baggy pants for a year and a day as a reminder not to mess with the City of Brass."

It might be antagonistic GMing, but it tends to solve the "seriously, stop calling evil genies when you want something" problem if it gets out of hand.

A scaling system of genie-binding can be good....

I can't quote you properly on my gilded imperial cellphone, but I <3 the second half of this post. Less funny, indeed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
chaoseffect wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Grammar Nazi wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
I can literally taste the salt in this post.

>:(

I promise I'm not being figurative. Quite literal in fact. Try tasting it.
I licked my screen and tasted no salt, so I guess that makes you a liar. LIAR.

*makes a note to put more ranks in bluff*


Grammar Nazi wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Grammar Nazi wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
I can literally taste the salt in this post.

>:(

I promise I'm not being figurative. Quite literal in fact. Try tasting it.
I could accept a claim that you literally tasted salt on your monitor, but not in the post.

Keep up the good work, sir.


Anzyr wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Xexyz wrote:
Blackwaltzomega wrote:
"The Wizard/Sorcerer/Arcanist Spell List is sufficiently powerful that a sufficiently clever player with good system mastery can solve basically any problem the GM can come up with" is correct.
Which is the crux of why it's so obnoxious. Because on the boards when people invoke Schrodinger's Wizard what they're really doing is using it as a premise for bragging about how smart they are and how much system mastery they have, which gets annoying.
When push comes to shove and builds are required for a contest, you will find that it is the Fighter's who invoke Schrodinger's, while the Wizards have full builds.

Do you have an example of other than after you incorporated 1000 posts worth of prodding into your hypothetical build and then produced Schrodingers actual wizard? Or the time that there were serious questions about how mythic rules should be interpreted where the "arbiter" went with his bias, and against raw, to nerf the fighter? Or the time that the "arbiter" declared that the fighter couldn't take a CRB feat? Or the time that people actually agreed with your general premise and agreed also to serve as your foil, but you acted like a friggin three-year-old with out his biddy everytime someone actually make you prove a statement rather than just accept your knowledge as fact?

Oh, wait... Those were actually all the same time.

Do you have an example other than that?

I can literally taste the salt in this post.

Of course I wanted there to be established metagame rules, otherwise "provide a build" is completely irrelevant to the discussion. And believe me, I had many things ruled against me, and I still put in an observable build. Complete with multiple spellbooks and everything.

The fact remains:

Wizard = observable.
Fighter = Error 404 - No build found.

Also, the reason I hate builds is because they don't actually prove anything. I provided a build that shows how...

See, the is you being an obstinate 3 year old again. You make up your mind what people believe without reading! I the other thread I said NO LESS THAN 10 TIMES, that I think you are right. I actually say many of the exact same things all over the boards here. I was willing to play Devils advocate and be your foil, but you wouldn't engage my questions. You simply asserted that you won and then moved on.

So after 1500 posts Andreww showed up and posted a set of rules for a match. I agreed to build under those rules a fighter that was to be an ACTUAL challenge, so that no one in the future could accuse you of sand bagging the fight.

Then, within just a few hours of my acceptance, Andreww amended the rules by banning feats, and item options, and by reading against RAW on what was the actual topic at hand mythic rules.

ALSO, all of that doesn't include the 5 seperate builds that got posted in that thread before the challenge and the DOZENS of builds posted afterward.


Anzyr wrote:
chaoseffect wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Grammar Nazi wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
I can literally taste the salt in this post.

>:(

I promise I'm not being figurative. Quite literal in fact. Try tasting it.
I licked my screen and tasted no salt, so I guess that makes you a liar. LIAR.
*makes a note to put more ranks in bluff*

Guys. It's obvious why you can't taste the salt. Someone else tasted it first. It's gone. Anzyr ate the salt.

You should thuggerize him. With clubs.


Inlaa wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
chaoseffect wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Grammar Nazi wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
I can literally taste the salt in this post.

>:(

I promise I'm not being figurative. Quite literal in fact. Try tasting it.
I licked my screen and tasted no salt, so I guess that makes you a liar. LIAR.
*makes a note to put more ranks in bluff*

Guys. It's obvious why you can't taste the salt. Someone else tasted it first. It's gone. Anzyr ate the salt.

You should thuggerize him. With clubs.

OBJECTION!

With the amount of salt in that post no one person could have ate it alone and lived. Multiple people must have got at it and ate up the remaining salt.


HyperMissingno wrote:
Inlaa wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
chaoseffect wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
Grammar Nazi wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
I can literally taste the salt in this post.

>:(

I promise I'm not being figurative. Quite literal in fact. Try tasting it.
I licked my screen and tasted no salt, so I guess that makes you a liar. LIAR.
*makes a note to put more ranks in bluff*

Guys. It's obvious why you can't taste the salt. Someone else tasted it first. It's gone. Anzyr ate the salt.

You should thuggerize him. With clubs.

OBJECTION!

With the amount of salt in that post no one person could have ate it alone and lived. Multiple people must have got at it and ate up the remaining salt.

OBJECTION!

...I got nothin'. Proceed.


@Anzyr

You need to put up or shut up. Post pictures of you licking your salty monitor.

And to keep to the spirit of demands to Anzyr, I will not post pictures of my salty monitor. Later in an unrelated thread, I will act worst than you ever did when criticizing the speed at which it took you to post such proof.

EDIT: Tech steps
1) Upload to this website
2) Use resultant link to post into this thread.
3) Posting url syntax comma delimited: [,u,r,l,=,<website url>,],<a word>,[,/,u,r,l,]


andreww wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Do you have an example of other than after you incorporated 1000 posts worth of prodding into your hypothetical build and then produced Schrodingers actual wizard? Or the time that there were serious questions about how mythic rules should be interpreted where the "arbiter" went with his bias, and against raw, to nerf the fighter? Or the time that the "arbiter" declared that the fighter couldn't take a CRB feat?

You mean the time that you wanted to demonstrate the ability of a level 20/mythic rank 10 fighter to even reach the same playing field as a level 20 non mythic caster by having a high level wizard cohort via leadership or twisting the wording of the archmage path ability. The event where I was so biased against the fighter that I denied various of Anzyr's attempts to create simulacrums of Cthullu and other elder gods and gave a fairly strict time limit which greatly favoured the fighter.

Yeah, that one where despite several claims to have fighter builds none actually materialised.

1) that wasn't my purpose in that thread

2) I didn't start that thread
3) we didn't even get to what my cohort choice might have been, don't presume to choose for me
4) you mean the path ability that works explicitly and specifically as I wanted to use it?

AND!, that thread has a bunch of fighter builds

Community & Digital Content Manager

Locking. We're done here.

451 to 462 of 462 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Five things the Pathfinder message boards taught me that were wrong All Messageboards
Recent threads in General Discussion