|Jiggy RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32|
|4 people marked this as a favorite.|
@Odraude - I think we're getting lost in examples here. The core issue is this:
As the game progresses, you face bigger and badder foes. As a result, this is inescapable: You need sufficient X to overcome the increasing challenges.
In theory, X could be anything: levels, magic, gear, whatever. But the reason you're able to defeat now what you couldn't defeat before is because you've now acquired enough X.
Now if this is going to be a game where you can choose how you approach (such as by choosing a class), then for the game to be as fun as it can be, the following also needs to be true: Every class needs access to X.
X could still be anything, just as long as it's the same X. If continuing to advance requires sufficient poodles, then every class needs access to poodles. Or from the other direction, if the only thing you want every class to have access to is rhubarbs, then rhubarbs had better be capable of letting you advance.
Whatever you pick for one, you need to pick the same for the other.
Currently, Pathfinder fails in this regard: the only thing that everyone has access to is levels, but the thing you have to have in order to advance is magic.
The fighter MUST acquire magic in some form in order to keep playing, no matter what else he has. The wizard (or other PC with magic) can keep playing with relatively little regard for what other (nonmagical) things he lacks.
This is a flaw in the system: there's a mismatch between what you need and what you can access.
For Pathfinder to improve, it needs to align the two: either change what lets you advance from "magic" to "levels" (letting everyone gain tools to keep playing the game, as a function of level, independent of other factors); or else take the thing that's required to advance (magic) and make it more evenly accessible.
Either path is fine, as long as where we end up is that what's required to keep playing the game is readily and evenly accessible to everyone.