Steve Geddes, I did not lump you in with 'co'. A while back, I posted something, and BP responded, along with some echoers of his sentiments, that's the 'co'. As for level ranges, do your current games exist in a level range that is less than 1-20?
BP, I agree it isn't ok to insult others for their viewpoint. I disagree with your mythic position, but you're not a drooling lackwit because of it.
Everyone who posted 'why not just gate', 'why not just dead', etc, you are also the people who rail against deity stats. As long as deities are mystery entities for stats, you will have to accept that it is quite likely that they don't die without their heads, only elaborate rituals will restore them, they can't use gates created by their worshipers and must instead pass through specially ritually constructed portals, etc.
Steve Geddes, I did not lump you in with 'co'. A while back, I posted something, and BP responded, along with some echoers of his sentiments, that's the 'co'. As for level ranges, do your current games exist in a level range that is less than 1-20?
No worries, I wasn't sure who you meant.
Our PF games never go over tenth level. It takes too long higher than that (plus, we generally have a TPK around levels seven or eight.
|
As I said on page 1 so long ago, they really shouldn't do epic rules until they're done releasing new base classes. Since they haven't touched on psionics, I think epic rules would be a bad deal still at this time because then they'd have to release a follow up to it for any classes they create after it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Would love to see a GMM II that dealt specifically with 10th-20th gameplay/issues, making high-lvl play as good as possible, etc. Then, perhaps Mythic-lvl rules.
|
As I said on page 1 so long ago, they really shouldn't do epic rules until they're done releasing new base classes. Since they haven't touched on psionics, I think epic rules would be a bad deal still at this time because then they'd have to release a follow up to it for any classes they create after it.
Well you make a good point, but I don´t really see the moment when they stop to publish ne classes. Of course IF they decide to do psionics (sorry, but the Wotc treatment left me with a rather bad impression, especially reagarding balacing and support) they could just as well add the epic psionic contend to that book.
In my opinion, level 21+ rules (Epic, Mythic, or whatever one chooses to call them) are mathematicaly ill-conceived and conceptually redundant. They are the amp that goes to eleven.
That said, if Paizo makes them, I won't get upset -- I'll just ignore them. A 21+ AP would also be an auto-skip, just like Jade Regent was. Can't please everyone all of that time and all that...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Only 25% of the community plays the game past level 6 as far as I can tell.What?
That means that only 25% of the community plays the books 3+ of Paizo's AP and that 75% of the people that play PFS retire their characters half-way.
I sure there is something wrong with that.
After 15+ years of RPGs, I feel confident to say one thing:
Fans often buy books just to have and read them. I have so many adventures and RPGs in my collection, but I will never ever try to run them with my gaming group.
... psionics (sorry, but the Wotc treatment left me with a rather bad impression, especially reagarding balacing and support) ...
I'd actually really like to know what you mean, here. Did you look at 3.0 (which was pretty awful), or 3.5 (which was the most well balanced system in 3.5, until the Complete series, which were all over the place in terms of balance for magic, psionics, and everything else). If you'd like I'd be more than happy to discuss it on another thread, or by PM. I do agree that they didn't do much of anything with it, though, which is sad.
|
|
... psionics (sorry, but the Wotc treatment left me with a rather bad impression, especially reagarding balacing and support) ...I'd actually really like to know what you mean, here. Did you look at 3.0 (which was pretty awful), or 3.5 (which was the most well balanced system in 3.5, until the Complete series, which were all over the place in terms of balance for magic, psionics, and everything else). If you'd like I'd be more than happy to discuss it on another thread, or by PM. I do agree that they didn't do much of anything with it, though, which is sad.
Quick answer before bed: 3.0 was pretty terrible, the XPH fixed a lot of things, even if I recall some broken abilities (used to read the character optimization board a lot back when I still bought Wotc stuff), even the treatment in de ELH wasn´t bad. Its just that it was never really supported.
My group played Forgotten Realms and psionics, just didn`t seem supported well enough. Magic/Psionic transparency was ... an interesting topic.In the end psionics is an optional system, and our game was complicated enough, I guess it´s really the support issue and 3.0 book was awful.
Of course once you came to epic levels all the fun was creating epic spells, can´t recall right now if psionic casters got access to it, but of course while it was fun to create spells with it - it was broken as hell. Running arround with personal mythals .... ^^
Psionics definitely got the short end in epics. Technically they had the same seeds as mages in the ELH, but they never got an equivalent when new seeds came out. Also, it never, ever made sense that any psionics character got the undeath seed.
Also, yeah 3.0 was bad. Some fascinating ideas, but terrible in actual gameplay.
EDIT: meant to add, that I'm sorry that 3.0's badness turned you guys off. Also, the Char-Op boards were rough on everything, but magic far outweighed psionics, as I recalled. I mean: Pun-Pun.
To answer an earlier question regarding popularity of high level and purchasing of low level: how many campaigns have you played from the low levels up into the high levels? If the answer is "often", than congratulations: you're a rare breed. The disparity arises because people often get new ideas, games end early, and it slowly becomes ever more difficult over time to continue a game with a set time. Many gaming groups simply leave a story unfinished and start anew because they have a great idea for a new character or are board with or tired of the current dynamics. In my case, it can sometimes become difficult to motivate my wife's characters, for example, when they've found "true love". Sometimes the high level play overwhelms a particular GM, player, or group. This is a thing that happens, and I, for one, would never claim otherwise. It also doesn't automatically reflect poorly on the player, GM, or group. It just means their tastes are different.
Quite frankly, reaching 20th level, much less epic, is a difficult road unless you're generous with XP, start at a higher-than-first level, or game often. And that doesn't suit everyone.
In getting to high levels, I've found two other understandable common elements that blend to create that motivational problem: the intimidation factor of high levels, and the impression (based often on the level charts) that the game is coming to an end soon.
Having a guide book that sports high level and 21+ play, and that blends them well, will help alleviate that problem somewhat. Having more support to encourage it would also be helpful in growing those who would play it. A general book, a Golarion book, a few adventures, and possibly an AP (though unlikely more) would go a long way to making people more familiar with it and more comfortable: show them examples of how to use it, and use it well.
Anyway, I've got more to say, but iPad-posts are slow and painful. I'll click buttons at you guys more later. :)
EDIT ALSO: also, I'm blaming the iPad for the ugly post and spelling errors. :)
No worries, I wasn't sure who you meant.
Our PF games never go over tenth level. It takes too long higher than that (plus, we generally have a TPK around levels seven or eight.
No worries on my end either, I was just clarifying since you asked.
Given that you only go to 10th level, there are already modules you can't really use, unless you modify them. (Our recent mutual purchase of the Moonscar comes to mind.) Wouldn't mythic level modules get the same even treatment as the high level ones do today?
I'm running into year four with my current group, and we're just now hitting fifteenth level. It does take awhile, I agree, but really MOST of the modules aren't going to see use by me. I read them just for the entertainment value, and maybe pilfer something here and there from one for the game.
Heck, the mythepic rules aren't even announced already and we have flamewars over them. I'd give two thumbs up if I was not an armless bag...
LOL :D
No worries, I wasn't sure who you meant.
Our PF games never go over tenth level. It takes too long higher than that (plus, we generally have a TPK around levels seven or eight.
No worries on my end either, I was just clarifying since you asked.
Given that you only go to 10th level, there are already modules you can't really use, unless you modify them. (Our recent mutual purchase of the Moonscar comes to mind.) Wouldn't mythic level modules get the same even treatment as the high level ones do today?
I'm running into year four with my current group, and we're just now hitting fifteenth level. It does take awhile, I agree, but really MOST of the modules aren't going to see use by me. I read them just for the entertainment value, and maybe pilfer something here and there from one for the game.
Yeah, the chance of me using any actual PF module/supplement/AP is becoming smaller and smaller as my library rapidly outstrips my need for material.
I'm not of the "Dont make epic rules because it will be crap" camp, nor of the "Dont make epic rules because I wont buy it" group, either. I fully expect Paizo's attempt at mythic rules to be very solid and an enjoyable read. My sole point is that I have different preferences - there are things I'd like more and as mythic rules moves into sight, the amount of those things I'd like more of will necessarily diminish.
In my perfect world, Paizo would meet everyone's needs. There'd be mythic, epic, psionic, modern, SF, etcetera rules. I'd get fortnightly APs and modules and more sourcebooks and companions than I could possibly need. The trouble is we're not living in a perfect world and the paizo staff need to eat, breathe and relax from time to time.
Opportunity cost is a bummer, but it's an economic fact of life.
Would love to see a GMM II that dealt specifically with 10th-20th gameplay/issues, making high-lvl play as good as possible, etc. Then, perhaps Mythic-lvl rules.
I'd support this as well.
I, for one, enjoy high-level play (not that I get there very often).
A simplified combat resolution system for levels 11-20 in one guide, then a separate level 20+ rules book would be great.
Those that don't want to play past level ten don't have to buy either book. Those that want to hit level 15+ only have to buy one book. Players like me that like the idea of my PC having Rovagog as a pet would buy both books.
I don't know if going that route is easier or harder for the good folks of Paizo, but it seems as close to a win-win as you can get.
YMMV
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not to long ago we did a survey on these boards which levels people play to/retire at and also which they would like to play at. It was overwelmingly 12+ with the common reason being that it was difficult to get into games at higher level either due to PFS-like cut off, APs stopping or otherwise forced retirement or slower play thereafter such as lack of content.
It also showed that this idea that 1-6ish level play is most desirable was both false and misunderstood. It is that way because it is most common and because it is forced, not because thats what people actually want. Just that there are few alteratives.
|
If you recall Palladium sicced lawyers on WOTC on that book and several others including TSR asked them very strongly to cease and desist.
Yes, for mentioning their product. I'm not sure what your point has to do with anything besides 'get permission before mentioning someone else's IP in your product'.
Not to long ago we did a survey on these boards which levels people play to/retire at and also which they would like to play at. It was overwelmingly 12+ with the common reason being that it was difficult to get into games at higher level either due to PFS-like cut off, APs stopping or otherwise forced retirement or slower play thereafter such as lack of content.
It also showed that this idea that 1-6ish level play is most desirable was both false and misunderstood. It is that way because it is most common and because it is forced, not because thats what people actually want. Just that there are few alteratives.
No offense, Becket, but that was hardly rigorous.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay. Once again we have World War I style trench warfare about above-20 gameplay :)
Here's the thing. Virtually every player and GM out there has some cherished chestnut of the system they wish Paizo would support more fully. For some it's psionics. For others it's oriental-style adventures, or underdark, or tengu, or what-have-you.
And for some of us it's mythic level material.
I'm truly sorry that so many of you have had bad experiences with high-level play. Really. But there's nothing about that experience that makes high-level play inherently bad, any more than oriental material and catfolk and ratfolk and tengus (oh my!) are inherently bad source material just because I had a bad game of Bushido once.
Our group has been playing high level games for about 6 years now. Very high level. And we've been enjoying it. Not uncategorically. Not without exception. But I don't see that as any different than the low-level games I've played in. I do use the 3.5e SRD's divine powers rules, and The Primal Order, and I also use the ELH and Cochrane's epic bestiary (though only in teeny bits, even a wyrmling void dragon would wipe out my group) and with thanks to Kain Darkwind and that crowd I've drawn pretty heavily on Dicefreaks. I decided to go the Primal Order route rather than using Cochrane's Ascension rules, though that would certainly be another route. It's all worked out pretty well, and we're now in the final stages of the campaign.
There probably is some truth to statements that working on mythic level material will detract from something else. To that I say "so what?" Working on anything means something else isn't worked on. Working on the Tian Xia stuff meant that stuff I wanted wasn't worked on. *shrug* That's the nature of the beast. Maybe I didn't want it, but certainly plenty of people did.
For everyone who's saying that producing above-21 material is a bad idea, I assume you have in mind something that you personally would rather see produced. How is that any different than the folks that want to see very high level material, except that it's what you want instead of what someone else wants?
|
|
No offense, Becket, but that was hardly rigorous.Not to long ago we did a survey on these boards which levels people play to/retire at and also which they would like to play at. It was overwelmingly 12+ with the common reason being that it was difficult to get into games at higher level either due to PFS-like cut off, APs stopping or otherwise forced retirement or slower play thereafter such as lack of content.
It also showed that this idea that 1-6ish level play is most desirable was both false and misunderstood. It is that way because it is most common and because it is forced, not because thats what people actually want. Just that there are few alteratives.
Rigorous?
Rigorous?No offense, Becket, but that was hardly rigorous.Not to long ago we did a survey on these boards which levels people play to/retire at and also which they would like to play at. It was overwelmingly 12+ with the common reason being that it was difficult to get into games at higher level either due to PFS-like cut off, APs stopping or otherwise forced retirement or slower play thereafter such as lack of content.
It also showed that this idea that 1-6ish level play is most desirable was both false and misunderstood. It is that way because it is most common and because it is forced, not because thats what people actually want. Just that there are few alteratives.
Yes. The survey hardly is indicative of buying or playing trends, and merely indicative of the trends of people who answer those sort of surveys online.
TOZ - Well, you assume that entire games don't have rules. Why are you getting hung up on him assuming the same of a mere supplement?I'm not, I was clarifying his statement. You're also incorrect in your assumption about what I believe concerning other games.
Everybody has to believe something. I believe I'll head over to Buffalo Wild Wings and have a beer :)
All this discussion about epic rule sets has me excited for Friday's game, too, even if I won't have gug minis until who knows when. I'll have to think of something else nasty ...
|
|
Sorry, I don't carry cash. I got 5, hit ya back on payday? :)
Edit: Also, did you get my email about Patrons of the Monstrous Arts?
All this discussion about epic rule sets has me excited for Friday's game, too, even if I won't have gug minis until who knows when. I'll have to think of something else nasty ...
I saw the pics of that on the blog and was all O.o at it. Sure would hate to be in that party...
|
|
Yes. The survey hardly is indicative of buying or playing trends, and merely indicative of the trends of people who answer those sort of surveys online.
Your right, there where a few of them, and not the end-all-be-all, I'm just saying. The fact that PFS cuts off at 12, (13th somewhat), and the APs end in the 12-17ish area, there isn't much content really past level 15, and not really all that much past 10th.
I think it is basically circular logic, Paizo, (and most companies) priduce a lot of 1st - 8th level material, and not much 12th+ level material, and a combination of basing on sales (vote with your wallet) and tending to listen to a vocal minority (like you said with the survey, and I'm not disagreeing) eads to the very possibly false belief that people love lower level play the most, when there really isn't a huge set of other options. Lets makes a lot of lower level material as that what sells. Hey, lower level material sells, that must be what people want.
I should also point out that the entirty of Pathfinder (core) is also basically because people answered surveys (or somethig similar) online. :)
Sorry, I don't carry cash. I got 5, hit ya back on payday? :)
Edit: Also, did you get my email about Patrons of the Monstrous Arts?
All this discussion about epic rule sets has me excited for Friday's game, too, even if I won't have gug minis until who knows when. I'll have to think of something else nasty ...I saw the pics of that on the blog and was all O.o at it. Sure would hate to be in that party...
Oh come on ... you know you're dying to face hordes of shoggoths, denizens of Leng, gibbering orbs and gugs, admit it :)
Dying would be the operative word.
Absolutely. But at that level, dying is such a transient thing ...
edit: It's so much more fun posting from the bar ... :-)
Wanna know one of the reasons that high-level, much less "epic"-level content is so rare? Because by that level, like Snorter said, it's hard to think up plots that actually stand up to the least bit of scrutiny. Either the players should use their high-level powers to make the "threat" a non-issues rather easily, or the BBEG should use his high-level powers to make the threat happen long before the characters get wind of it.
With respect it sounds like you are taking a problem you've had personally (or your GM has had personally) and stating it as a universal law of nature. It isn't, it's just your personal experience. I've played in some pretty awesome high level games not lacking in plot, and back when I GMed regularly I ran mostly high level games. There is nothing preventing one from having a good plot.
So... I suspect a good book on high level play could help you through these problems! ;)
That and the Modern Path has already covered the SCI FI angles.
modern version of Pathfinder
sci-fi version of Pathfinder
The physicists and philosophers haven't figured out time travel in this world, and you want to bring those into Golarion?
Terrible X)
I would like to see Paizo, or anybody else, do a take on them. I personally don't like Modern Path. I find the rules hard to use and clunky. I see no purpose of having a single Base Hero class, then EVERY archetype changes EVERTHING about the class. The ru
es would make more sense if they just printed out seperate classes.