I've been hearing all of this about classes being returned to being closer to 3.5. This terrifies me, because I loved most of the changes. What is everyone meaning by this? Give me some examples of what you're talking about and how you know this. Please :)
Pure conjecture:
I think they're talking about Domains, Arcane Schools and Bloodlines, but this is pure conjecture. It was the biggest departure from 3.5, and did the most damage to existing statblocks.
Maybe they found some golden compromise that let them keep the goodness of the beta powers without forcing GMs to recompile 3.5 material. Here's hoping.
And I thought that was some of the most interesting things about the Beta. If they want to play 3.5 they should, not try to ruin Pathfinder.
Pure conjecture:
I think they're talking about Domains, Arcane Schools and Bloodlines, but this is pure conjecture. It was the biggest departure from 3.5, and did the most damage to existing statblocks.
Maybe they found some golden compromise that let them keep the goodness of the beta powers without forcing GMs to recompile 3.5 material. Here's hoping.
Man,
I hope that's not what it is. Honestly, my players are all getting excited about switching over. If all the new stuff goes away, then why am I pre-ordering both books? I already got 3.5 core and monster manuals.:( :( :( :( :(
|
I'd hate to see a lot of reversion as well, but right now I'm just taking a wait-and-see. I really hope barbarians don't lose those rage powers(I thought they could use some work, but the idea was solid).
This has me wondering...
Would Paizo allow a sort of BETA-based "SRD" containing only those mechanics that don't make it into the final product at all, so that they would be readily available to new players that weren't able to grab the Beta while it was available?
Creative Director
|
This has me wondering...
Would Paizo allow a sort of BETA-based "SRD" containing only those mechanics that don't make it into the final product at all, so that they would be readily available to new players that weren't able to grab the Beta while it was available?
The Beta will still be out there, of course, and what customers do with it is up to them. We won't be supporting the Beta rules officially though.
That said, don't worry TOO much about all of the new stuff in the Beta going away. A lot of it is staying... just not all of it. We'll be starting up previews of the rules in a couple of days that'll continue on a weekly schedule until the game releases at Gen Con, in any event.
|
This has me wondering...
Would Paizo allow a sort of BETA-based "SRD" containing only those mechanics that don't make it into the final product at all, so that they would be readily available to new players that weren't able to grab the Beta while it was available?
The Beta will still be out there, of course, and what customers do with it is up to them. We won't be supporting the Beta rules officially though.
That said, don't worry TOO much about all of the new stuff in the Beta going away. A lot of it is staying... just not all of it. We'll be starting up previews of the rules in a couple of days that'll continue on a weekly schedule until the game releases at Gen Con, in any event.
First thing's first, JJ... you guys rock!
Second, I echo the concerns over backwards compatibility. So I appreciate the comment not to worry TOO much.
Third, too darn late to worry about backwards compatibility now anyway. Doubt you are gonna stop the presses and make a change now.
Fourth... does the index have the right page numbers now? lol
Thanks James. I'm just really worried about Pathfinder being too much like 3.5 as Beta had some wonderful ideas. I just hope you guys didn't listen too much to the crowd that just wanted a new cover for their 3.5 Player's Handbook.
Would Paizo allow a sort of BETA-based "SRD" containing only those mechanics that don't make it into the final product at all, so that they would be readily available to new players that weren't able to grab the Beta while it was available?
I'm pretty sure the Beta (and Alpha) itself is released under the OGL + Pathfinder Licence (allowing that usage), and in any case you're free to synopsize the relevant rules since game rules can't be patented. ...Though I seriously don't think that will be preferable to using the final rules (unless things like ambiguity to which bonuses apply to Combat Maneuvers are your cup of tea).
|
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
The changes are difficult to characterize, especially because there are a LOT of little tweaks to spells and skills and stuff throughout the whole document. That said (and I think a lot of playtests have born this out), a lot of those types of changes are not immediately obvious until they come up in play. I fully expect that people will find minor changes (we like to think they're "improvements") years from now. Does a change that you don't even notice for an entire campaign make it more or less compatible with 3.5? In a lot of cases the answer is "neither." The spell is still called what it is called, but there's some minor change that makes it easier to use in play.
Then there are things that we threw in there to see how far we could take things. The original Alpha skill system is probably the best example of this, but the "rage point" mechanic is another. That sort of change grated on people because "point counting" has never really been a part of the game, and it especially hasn't been a part of a class as relatively straightforward as the barbarian. In this case we brought the new (and completely kickass) rules for raging closer to 3.5, in that they are presented in a way that will not give a heart attack to point-haters while still offering something new, cool, and exciting for the barbarian.
There are a few more examples of this, but no one should be afraid that we've suddenly added back Use Rope or we've given up on the idea of filling out dead class levels or what have you.
The previews will reveal more.
Use Rope didn't come back . . .?!?
You are all dead to me.
|
Off To Print - to me this is a time to rally behind PAIZO, to eagerly await the decisions made, and a time to move, as a community from designer/developer mode toward implementation and acceptance mode. This should be an exciting time, and also one of realization that at our own tables we are free to use Beta elements if we loved them, free to use the final Pathfinder RPG RAW, or even some combination with suggested changes from Monte's Collected Books of Experimental Might.
In the end, we will stull be playing OGL material, and still supporting the company that dared to hear the voices of the community and boldly step forward as both champions of tradition and continuity, backward compatibility, as well as forward thinking, cutting edge desgin. Think about all the great things that have come from the pen of James Jacobs, Erik Mona, Jason Bulmahn, Monte Cook, and the rest of the PAIZO team!
Yea! Verily! Now is a time to trust! There need be no worries, but rather celebration and trust that everything will be alright.
|
4E is just a ploy for Wizard's of the Coast to make money, and people buy it because they don't know any better.
Please back this statement with evidence. As both player and DM of basic D&D, 1st edition AD&D, 3.x, and now 4E, I'd like to know where I "didn't know better."
This new Pathfinder material that Paizo has put out looks very promising, I must say, and it could be compatible with v3.5 very easily. But, and let me say this, if you want to play actual D&D, you should really stick with the earlier versions of the game because they are a lot closer to the game that Dave Arneson and Gary Gygax created.
Why? I did and hated those versions of D&D. I enjoy 3.x., its Pathfinder offshoot (via the OGL), and 4E.
|
|
4E is just a ploy for Wizard's of the Coast to make money, and people buy it because they don't know any better.Please back this statement with evidence. As both player and DM of basic D&D, 1st edition AD&D, 3.x, and now 4E, I'd like to know where I "didn't know better."
This new Pathfinder material that Paizo has put out looks very promising, I must say, and it could be compatible with v3.5 very easily. But, and let me say this, if you want to play actual D&D, you should really stick with the earlier versions of the game because they are a lot closer to the game that Dave Arneson and Gary Gygax created.Why? I did and hated those versions of D&D. I enjoy 3.x., its Pathfinder offshoot (via the OGL), and 4E.
No edition war flames please... let's just stay on topic. He was obviously expressing his opinion and his feelings. which are as valid as any one else's.
AD&D is still the best to me... lol I remember just more organic pure fun... no worrying about position and minis and ten dozen die rolls just to do something; there were a few pages of rules and lots of fun stuff, as opposed to a book no one can possibly remember with all its many rules and exceptions.
That being said... GURPS still rules them all. lol But I think Pathfinder may be able to give it a good fight! We'll see soon enough!
Ha ha! I'm an old GURPS player myself and I love that system...
My son got me interested in D&D again and I downloaded the Beta Pathfinder and have enjoyed playing it very much.
I think that the Beta solved some problems with 3.5 (we're actually using "grapple" now) and the Bard got so much better. We've never tested the Barbarian, but the monk (now lvl. 5) seems to work out fine, so I'm looking forward to my copy of PFRPG, which i ordered at my Local Game Store. I'm running RotRL with the Beta and that worked fine.
GRU
|
|
No edition war flames please... let's just stay on topic. He was obviously expressing his opinion and his feelings. which are as valid as any one else's.
As was I.
Back to the topic then, which is discussing folks' fear about Pathfinder rpg rules moving closer to original d20 SRD, not[ WotC is out to make money from folks who don't know better nor actual D&D is older editions (pre-3.x).
I pretty much agree with the other on-topic posts here: wait. Wait until we see the previews; wait until we see the production model. Because the beta is still available, it will be no great shakes to re-introduced some of the more radical features (e.g., barbarian rage points) into one's campaign if one wants to. Heck, I'm already giving serious thought to replacing my Pathfinder campaign fighters feats with the abilities from Bo9S; eliminating sorcerers; power wizards with Monte Cook's BoXM; replace monks with martial artists from Goodman Games; and clerics cast spells with a skill die roll ala BESM's Advanced d20 Magic.
I doubt that the classes themselves will go back to 3.5. The variant Barbarian and Paladin we got on the boards will be in (with a few tweaks), and the bard will have some more changes (The 19th-level Jack-Of-All-Trades will be split into three abilities you get at something like 5, 10, 15, or thereabouts), and the schools, domains and bloodlines will be tweaked.
But that will be it.
You all know my prophetic visions into the future (Aroden isn't really dead, I keep him in my basement), so you know it will all come to pass as I said!
But I hope it doesn't take being an Olympic level wrestler to be able to tie someone up. ;)
Depends on who you want to tie up. Little Timmy, the weak urchin boy? No need to be a OLW.
Houdini? Not even the OLW will pull it off. It's all relative.
AD&D is still the best to me... lol I remember just more organic pure fun... no worrying about position and minis and ten dozen die rolls just to do something; there were a few pages of rules and lots of fun stuff, as opposed to a book no one can possibly remember with all its many rules and exceptions.
I only know AD&D 2e, which I'd describe as "a frew pages of rules and lots of restrictions and redundand tables" really.
3e's emphasis on choice (and its consequences) rathar than strict limitations made it the best D&D ever to me, and I think Pathfinder will go further down that path! The goal should be no limitations "just because", no rules that cannot be explained but with "it's a rule in a game".
You all know my prophetic visions into the future (Aroden isn't really dead, I keep him in my basement), so you know it will all come to pass as I said!
May I have some more ambrosia, please? I'm hungry!
I look forward to the release of the hardcover, and to the previews. The Beta to me is an excellent work and I would use that given nothing else to work with, I really feel it is a step above 3.5 taking D&D to the future nicely.
1st ed still has a special place in gaming lore and gaming history, it is the real father of RPGs. All the previous D&D was just a build up and then it happened a great game that caught the world's attention and started what we now call PnP gaming. Now it's a little old, and a little worn, but there is still a wondrous magic left in her. She's the girl you fell in love with before you even knew what love was and she's the girl you still dream of on cold nights. Once in a while you call her, you spend a time reminiscing and you smile one more time. She may no longer be the prettiest girl in your world but that doesn't change the fact that you still treasure her as much if not more then you did all those years ago.
Did I mention I still think 1st ed is a rather good system? I look forward to pathfinder, but I remember my roots.
|
I shall always look upon 1e with fondness, since, 26 years ago, I started playing AD&D...however, it had plenty of flaws. (d4 Monk HD I'm looking at you...oh magic missile to the monk, you're dead.)
Can't wait to see the changes, I really really REALLY hope monk is the first thing posted for previews...
I really, really hope that the new Sorcerer bloodlines don't get cut. IMO, they are the most awesome feature of Pathfinder RPG.
In general, the new class abilities and removing of the "dead levels' is also really, really cool. I like that 4E makes all classes more exciting, but at the same time I hate the word "Powers", as it sounds like every class has magic - and it reminds me of WoW abilities. Pathfinder (beta at least) makes classes feel much more interesting, but still makes me feel like I'm playing P&P game, not a MMO.
So, my two cents are: Keep classes awesome!
I shall always look upon 1e with fondness, since, 26 years ago, I started playing AD&D...however, it had plenty of flaws. (d4 Monk HD I'm looking at you...oh magic missile to the monk, you're dead.)
That's funny to me because one of my players mention just a few days ago that he remembers when most of his characters started with 1 hit point. Crazy Brownies.
The same player pointed out what he like most about the general changes... having ever level of the class table filled with something, even if the abilities were minor. Made the classes look full.
I really, really hope that the new Sorcerer bloodlines don't get cut. IMO, they are the most awesome feature of Pathfinder RPG.
Never fear. They won't do that. They'll probably be changed, but not cut. It's far too great an idea.
I like that 4E makes all classes more exciting
I don't really see that. It all looked rather bland to me.
, but at the same time I hate the word "Powers", as it sounds like every class has magic - and it reminds me of WoW abilities.
And that's the reason. You get nothing but a set of powers. Everybody has spells, no one has anything else.
|
|
And that's the reason. You get nothing but a set of powers. Everybody has spells, no one has anything else.
Uh, no. Each class has its own unique abilities that can't be usurped by other classes, making each quite distinct. And the new experimental hybrid rules recently issued make the classes even more distinct.
I really, really hope that the new Sorcerer bloodlines don't get cut. IMO, they are the most awesome feature of Pathfinder RPG.
In general, the new class abilities and removing of the "dead levels' is also really, really cool. I like that 4E makes all classes more exciting, but at the same time I hate the word "Powers", as it sounds like every class has magic - and it reminds me of WoW abilities. Pathfinder (beta at least) makes classes feel much more interesting, but still makes me feel like I'm playing P&P game, not a MMO.
So, my two cents are: Keep classes awesome!
On the light of this thread, I would really love to see (as in another current thread, don't know how to link) in a couple years or so a PF Unearthed Arcana type of thing. I love rules tweaks and I think that, as long as the core rules are well-laid out (especially for backwards compatibility) many of us would be happy with a good array of alternative ways of doing things (I have always loved point systems, for instance, I remember using a homebrew point system for Basic D&D spells).
4E does make classes more exciting; you can personalize your character in really interesting ways (especially with the playtest Hybrid character rules, that's a good wink to old-school multiclass). What I do not find more exciting, and that's an opinion at my tabletop for running a weekly Scales of War campaign, is the actual implementation of character abilities, as usages can become rather repetitive: clear minions with area attacks, focus encounter powers on the big leader-types, save dailies for the climatic fight. No more fighters who keep going like a Duracell bunny vs. mages who have to really smart out to economize their precious resources... whatever. The tactical aspect of playing is more strong than the old-school "charge-hit-hit till it drops" thing, but strategies are a bit more reduced.
On the other hand, I love the skill challenge system. Though skeptical at first, it has really stimulated role-playing sections and non-combat situations with our group. Maybe it's not the flashiest element of 4e, but I find one of the few things (mechanics-wise, quite a few supplements are very good for background and GMastering) which make the new edition shine. Something I am missing is a set of character powers/class features which are especifically tailored for SCs. Some utilities are definitely usable, but their application to SCs feels a bit fuzzy to me, as SCs can extend in time for quite a bit... SC rulings for powers would definitely rock for reinforcing non-tactical combat aspects of character build.
Whatever 4e does or doesn't do well wont be solved here. This thread is more about what will Pathfinder be and how true to 3.5 it will be. I know I went a bit nostaligic about 1st ed but the point wasn't to start edition wars, it was to remember a great game while awaiting a fine successor to it.
4e is 4e, like it or not there are some here who hate it and some who love it. Bringing it up only gets people in a fighting mood, lets avoid that and celebrate the coming of a great game.
Make mine Pathfinder, I am holding you here at Paizo to very high standards because of the promise Beta showed us, and I expect only good things. Either way thanks for all the effort and all the time you've put into a game I love.
|
|
...there is still a wondrous magic left in her. She's the girl you fell in love with before you even knew what love was and she's the girl you still dream of on cold nights. Once in a while you call her, you spend a time reminiscing and you smile one more time. She may no longer be the prettiest girl in your world but that doesn't change the fact that you still treasure her as much if not more then you did all those years ago.
Once in a while? Are you kidding? I'd be bangin' her every night if I could, but I settle for Mondays now. 1e is for me, 2e's company, but for the past four years I've been having 3.x-somes. And in August, I'll she'll be screaming out the name Pathfinder!
* * *
And, in all seriousness, PAIZO recognizes the Open Game Movement is just getting started! Thanks to the OGL and the Pathfinder compatibility license, this can be a never-ending love affair.
For anyone who hasn't 'tasted' the kiss of Pathfinder Beta - download her and try her. And anyone looking for a little 'role-play' in the romance, try a one-night-stand with OSRIC 2.0... its the role-play Lolita! She's both easy and free! But a 3.5ishness is where its at! Our v.3.5 collections are usable, OGL materials like Necromancer Games Tome of Horrors I, II, II are usable, Ptolus and Monte's other works are usable... and you can still communicate with gamers who believe in certain 'sensibilities' of the classic game.
Pathfinder continues the history and tradition of 30+ years, but also offers fresh ideas, improvements, and enhancements to areas making them easier to play in-game.
Tell a friend about Pathfinder! Get a group together! It has never been a better time for 3.5/OGL/Pathfinder RPG gaming!
|
|
And I thought that was some of the most interesting things about the Beta. If they want to play 3.5 they should, not try to ruin Pathfinder.
While I'm someone who's been pretty vocal on Pathfinder RPG staying close to 3.5, you have my sympathies there. I want to assure you, however, that the outlook I favour would give (people like) you all the 3.5 departures and innovations you'd like to see in the two PFRPG rulebooks, as long as the remainder of the fanbase could "play 3.5" as you put it. But we can't, or at the very least can't do so using Paizo's Adventure Path modules published in August 2008 or later. And that's what this difficult issue is really about.
No one begrudges you (and those who think like you) the joy of trying out a new, exciting ruleset. People only get vocal about wishing to stay nearer to 3.5 when they don't want to be forced to buy a new ruleset just to continue enjoy the full benefit of their Pathfinder subscriptions (modules, Chronicles, APs).
We can only hope that Paizo's final solution will satisfy a great enough number of people in both camps (those primarily wishing to buy a new ruleset, and those primarily wishing to buy other products based on that ruleset). It's a thin line to walk, and I hope Paizo can pull it off.
And I thought that was some of the most interesting things about the Beta. If they want to play 3.5 they should, not try to ruin Pathfinder.While I'm someone who's been pretty vocal on Pathfinder RPG staying close to 3.5, you have my sympathies there. I want to assure you, however, that the outlook I favour would give (people like) you all the 3.5 departures and innovations you'd like to see in the two PFRPG rulebooks, as long as the remainder of the fanbase could "play 3.5" as you put it. But we can't, or at the very least can't do so using Paizo's Adventure Path modules published in August 2008 or later. And that's what this difficult issue is really about.
No one begrudges you (and those who think like you) the joy of trying out a new, exciting ruleset. People only get vocal about wishing to stay nearer to 3.5 when they don't want to be forced to buy a new ruleset just to continue enjoy the full benefit of their Pathfinder subscriptions (modules, Chronicles, APs).
We can only hope that Paizo's final solution will satisfy a great enough number of people in both camps (those primarily wishing to buy a new ruleset, and those primarily wishing to buy other products based on that ruleset). It's a thin line to walk, and I hope Paizo can pull it off.
No, I agree completely and I understand those wanting to continue using 3.5 with Pathfinder, I will continue using a large number of my own 3.5 books as well. But also, those people must also understand that Paizo IS creating a new ruleset, and not just rehashing the same ol' thing that Wizards put out a few years back, and sadly that's what some folks want. I agree I hope a good balance has been struck with the Pathfinder RPG, as I believe too much of a departure would be bad, and sticking too close would be just as bad.
But, I have faith in Paizo, and I think generally most of the people here do as well.|
|
...there is still a wondrous magic left in her. She's the girl you fell in love with before you even knew what love was and she's the girl you still dream of on cold nights. Once in a while you call her, you spend a time reminiscing and you smile one more time. She may no longer be the prettiest girl in your world but that doesn't change the fact that you still treasure her as much if not more then you did all those years ago.
Once in a while? Are you kidding? I'd be bangin' her every night if I could, but I settle for Mondays now. 1e is for me, 2e's company, but for the past four years I've been having 3.x-somes. And in August, I'll she'll be screaming out the name Pathfinder!
* * *
And, in all seriousness, PAIZO recognizes the Open Game Movement is just getting started! Thanks to the OGL and the Pathfinder compatibility license, this can be a never-ending love affair.For anyone who hasn't 'tasted' the kiss of Pathfinder Beta - download her and try her. And anyone looking for a little 'role-play' in the romance, try a one-night-stand with OSRIC 2.0... its the role-play Lolita! She's both easy and free! But a 3.5ishness is where its at! Our v.3.5 collections are usable, OGL materials like Necromancer Games Tome of Horrors I, II, II are usable, Ptolus and Monte's other works are usable... and you can still communicate with gamers who believe in certain 'sensibilities' of the classic game.
Pathfinder continues the history and tradition of 30+ years, but also offers fresh ideas, improvements, and enhancements to areas making them easier to play in-game.
Tell a friend about Pathfinder! Get a group together! It has never been a better time for 3.5/OGL/Pathfinder RPG gaming!
Huzzah!
I have to admit, though, that a big part of wanting to switch to Pathfinder RPG, for me, is the new art style. I always hated the 3.5 gritty art style and the cover. It felt very low-fantasy and just depressed me.
I love the way the races, classes and art in general looks. I like the new monster style and am also really excited about what the bestiary art will look like. I really believe that the art in an RPG influences game play and the underlying "feeling". Pathfinder art feels much more high-fantasy and old-school.
Also, I will say that 3e is my favorite D&D system. I have played 1e, 2e and also spent some time with Castles and Crusades (heavily influenced by D&D). I like the options and freedom that 3e gives. There's no restrictions on classes based on race, I like the d20 mechanic (including positive progression for saving throws and AC), and I like the sheer number of systems that can be added. Maybe I don't use grapple or flanking that much, but I'm glad it's there if I need it.
A lot of people will argue that the tactical/miniature focus of 4e is a more authentic D&D because it had its roots in a wargame - Chainmail. When Monte Cook helped design 3x, however, he wanted miniatures to be less of a focus and I like the way he designed the rules around this thought. I think it has the flexibility to be, both a good wargame AND just a P&P game. On the other hand, 1e doesn't have enough built-in options for wargaming and 4e is nearly impossible to be run without minis. So 3e has the sweet spot for me. Pathfinder fixes bugs and takes a page out of 4e to eliminate dead levels, which I think will make it the best RPG ever.
I agree, the Art is what brought me to Earthdawn...man I love Earthdawn!
A lot of people will argue that the tactical/miniature focus of 4e is a more authentic D&D because it had its roots in a wargame - Chainmail.
What was good 30+ years ago doesn't have to be good now.
And for the record: The sentiment of eliminating dead levels isn't really a 4e thing. It was there long before. Just like a lot of other things.
For example, I understand that 4e has something like PrCs, except that you tack them onto the class. I had that idea long before they announced 4e. "Prestige Paths", I called it.
A lot of people will argue that the tactical/miniature focus of 4e is a more authentic D&D because it had its roots in a wargame - Chainmail.What was good 30+ years ago doesn't have to be good now.
And for the record: The sentiment of eliminating dead levels isn't really a 4e thing. It was there long before. Just like a lot of other things.
For example, I understand that 4e has something like PrCs, except that you tack them onto the class. I had that idea long before they announced 4e. "Prestige Paths", I called it.
Yeah, I loved Battletech when I was a kid...can't stand it now...played too many other wargames that move faster...
|
|
What was good 30+ years ago doesn't have to be good now.
A lot of people will argue that the tactical/miniature focus of 4e is a more authentic D&D because it had its roots in a wargame - Chainmail.
That's true. That's why I was a bit surprised that D&D became more complex until recently, bucking the trend against more simple systems offered like White Wolf. And while the upcoming Pathfinder RPG's CMB partially solves issues like grappling, others like determining AoO and high-level play still remain. (Unless you saw something in the production version, KaeYoss.)
And for the record: The sentiment of eliminating dead levels isn't really a 4e thing. It was there long before. Just like a lot of other things.
That's true. Tunnels & Trolls, from the earliest editions, gave PCs something every level. IMO, though, Green Ronin's True20 handles dead levels the best among d20 SRD system, including the PRPG. Gain a Feat or Power (if Adept). How simple can you get?
For example, I understand that 4e has something like PrCs, except that you tack them onto the class. I had that idea long before they announced 4e. "Prestige Paths", I called it.
You mean the tiers? Those aren't tacked on; they're chosen.
And while the upcoming Pathfinder RPG's CMB partially solves issues like grappling, others like determining AoO and high-level play still remain. (Unless you saw something in the production version, KaeYoss.)
I don't know, Attacks of Opportunity never seemed difficult for me in the first place. I just try to remember that if a PC is doing something other than attacking with a weapon during combat, it provokes an AoO.
Doesn't Pathfinder help high level play by removing the base skill multiplier? It's not a huge difference, but it's better than before.
|
|
Doesn't Pathfinder help high level play by removing the base skill multiplier? It's not a huge difference, but it's better than before.
I believe so. I definitely like the PRPG's skill system from the Beta. MUCH easier to use than 3.x when statting antagonists.
Speaking of skills, for my campaign, Concentration's coming back (sorry, Jason) and Fly's, well, flying away. And while I agree with Jason on Use Rope, I've been amazed how many times the skill's been asked for in my 3.x AND 4e games.
I can't WAIT to check out the encounter-building system in the PRPG.
And while I agree with Jason on Use Rope, I've been amazed how many times the skill's been asked for in my 3.x AND 4e games.
I have missed it I guess.
What is Jason's take on Use Rope (other than not using rope, since the skill went away)?
Speaking of skills, for my campaign, Concentration's coming back (sorry, Jason) and Fly's, well, flying away. And while I agree with Jason on Use Rope, I've been amazed how many times the skill's been asked for in my 3.x AND 4e games.I can't WAIT to check out the encounter-building system in the PRPG.
I'm not sure about Concentration yet, but I love Fly. Then again, I have a group that usually ends up with someone having the ability to fly (A dragonwrought kobold, a Favored Soul, a Druid with the Alternate Druid path from PHBII (with animal forms in place of wildshape, which by the way, is SOOOOOOO much easier and more intuitive than wildshape)).
|
|
Let me start by saying that I was not trying to start an Edition Flame War when I posted that last night. What I was trying to say, though, was that Wizard's of the Coast is more interested in selling products that make their profit margins increase, instead of making quality games that people WANT to play, like the folks here at Paizo.Agreed.
Let's all try to avoid a flamewar here. This is a legitimate topic that a lot of people are wondering about, and I'd hate for this thread to get heated to the point of uselessness.
In the interest of not wanting to fan any flames, I'll just say, off-topic, that I disagree with you about WotC, and don't kid yourself that Paizo's not looking for ways to increase its profit margin. (The company's not a charity.)
|
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
Looking at the balance sheet sometimes makes me think it is a charity, but yeah, let's keep comments about the motives of different companies publishing different games to other threads, please.
Totally understand where everyone is coming from on either side of this particular issue, but let's leave this thread for the issue at hand.
|
|
Looking at the balance sheet sometimes makes me think it is a charity
Well, you can always declare a finance company and need a bailout from the government. Course, y'all will have to hide that $100,000 trip to the Bahamas....
Totally understand where everyone is coming from on either side of this particular issue, but let's leave this thread for the issue at hand.
Well, we know that CMB made it into the production version. DC, on the other hand, is unknown and very important. (That number generated a lot of posts after fighters versus wizard debates.)
Barbarian rage is still in. Same with pally's Smite ability.
Anyone know which hitpoint system most likely made it into the final version?
That race lineup image on page 9 is gone; I believe new art was commissioned. Thank the gawds! An elf with the body of a fitness model? Uh, no.
New Polymorph most likely made it.
OT Response to Mona
Looking at the balance sheet sometimes makes me think it is a charity
Huh...yikes! :S I take it you were being sarcastic, but I still can't help but say, yikes!