Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
No more Emergency Force Sphere. Rot in pit you unnecessary piece of rules bloat. You are the worst designed spell in all of PF, and that's an accomplishment. Arcane casters DO NOT need a get out of jail free as an immediate action.I'm sorry I couldn't hear you over blood money and simulacrum creating magic bane bandersnaches, demiliches, and mini Cthulhu's to ride to the tune of my neighbor totoro.
Simulacrum and limited wish are still legal.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Instead of having Core Campaigns which drastically limit character customization (the main reason to play Pathfinder in the first place), I wish they would just ban everything that was featured prominently in this thread (plus a few other things) and then carry on as they have been.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
Simulacrum and limited wish are still legal.No more Emergency Force Sphere. Rot in pit you unnecessary piece of rules bloat. You are the worst designed spell in all of PF, and that's an accomplishment. Arcane casters DO NOT need a get out of jail free as an immediate action.I'm sorry I couldn't hear you over blood money and simulacrum creating magic bane bandersnaches, demiliches, and mini Cthulhu's to ride to the tune of my neighbor totoro.Restricted to Seeker level PCs due to being 7+ level spells, ne?
Well yeah, but I think a fair number of players want to replay retirement arch scenarios and/or modules. So those spells are very much in CORE, just in the tier that most people do not play. Of course not unlike animate dead those options are just worse without blood money they are not impossible, and I would not be surprised if a number of players chose to invest in a simulacrum, not unlike the investment into a planar ally.
Well I just wanted to mention it, I am not really invested in that particular aspect of the discussion.... but I am making notes for regular PFS (even if I really can't understand complaints about classes like Swashbuckler and Bloodrager).
You can no longer abuse other spell lists with limited wish since you don't have access to them.Simulacrum and limited wish are still legal.No more Emergency Force Sphere. Rot in pit you unnecessary piece of rules bloat. You are the worst designed spell in all of PF, and that's an accomplishment. Arcane casters DO NOT need a get out of jail free as an immediate action.I'm sorry I couldn't hear you over blood money and simulacrum creating magic bane bandersnaches, demiliches, and mini Cthulhu's to ride to the tune of my neighbor totoro.
True, but actually I would prefer a FAQ from the rules team regarding that issue.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Instead of having Core Campaigns which drastically limit character customization (the main reason to play Pathfinder in the first place), I wish they would just ban everything that was featured prominently in this thread (plus a few other things) and then carry on as they have been.
I see two potential issues with that. First, that may settle things as of now, but Paizo is always coming out with cool new stuff; we don't know what the next gamebreaker is going to be. Second, although the mercenary point of PFS is advertising for Paizo, the barrier to entry if you want your character to contribute cannot help but increase as more cool new stuff comes out. (Feral's story about initiative boosters is instructive.) It's not just system mastery; it's having a copy of "Sargava: The Lost Colony" if you want your character to have access to Piranha Strike, e.g. I am very much in favor of having a defined and limited rules set so that a novice player can drop a few bucks on the Core Rulebook pdf and jump right in.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
True!The main things I'll be happy not to see anymore are haste and dominate person! Oh, wait...no, those are still there.Well with summoners gone, that removes the level 2 haste, that is something.
To be blunt, that particular option is so good, that some summoner players kinda resent having it. If they don't cast haste... well apparently they are doing something wrong :(
|
|
To be blunt, that particular option is so good, that some summoner players kinda resent having it. If they don't cast haste... well apparently they are doing something wrong :(True!The main things I'll be happy not to see anymore are haste and dominate person! Oh, wait...no, those are still there.Well with summoners gone, that removes the level 2 haste, that is something.
I'm one of those players. I recently vowed never to cast haste again in PFS. As soon as I level up to 8th (7th currently) I'm going to swap it out. I know people will be annoyed at this, but I'm more annoyed at having it on my spell list.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
By stacked initiative I mean Reactionary, Improved Init, and Cracked Dusty Rose Ioun stone.
I recall during one special half the party got one-shot by the monster's opening move (not me) and I still didn't get to act before the monsters were all dead. Viva la Core!
I'm not sure Core is going to fix that. Here are some characters built with Core that you might still be racing against in initiative. Both are level 6 (halfway through the normal level range of PFS scenarios) and have less than the expected wealth by level. (I will spare you the builds, but suffice it to say that I gave each of them Reactionary and Improved Initiative.)
Initiative +10
Ranged +13 (2d8+28), +13 (1d8+14), and +8 (1d8+14)
Initiative +8
Melee +15 (6d8+24)
Core might eliminate many options, but there are still plenty of powerful builds to be had for those that want them.
By stacked initiative I mean Reactionary, Improved Init, and Cracked Dusty Rose Ioun stone.
I recall during one special half the party got one-shot by the monster's opening move (not me) and I still didn't get to act before the monsters were all dead. Viva la Core!
I'm not sure Core is going to fix that. Here are some characters built with Core that you might still be racing against in initiative. Both are level 6 (halfway through the normal level range of PFS scenarios) and have less than the expected wealth by level. (I will spare you the builds, but suffice it to say that I gave each of them Reactionary and Improved Initiative.)
Initiative +10
Ranged +13 (2d8+28), +13 (1d8+14), and +8 (1d8+14)
Initiative +8
Melee +15 (6d8+24)Core might eliminate many options, but there are still plenty of powerful builds to be had for those that want them.
How are you getting 6d8 in melee - especially at Level 6?
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think anyone's arguing that powerful/overpowered/broken options don't exist in Core.
I think the general idea is that the lack of additional broken options will deter the playerbase prone to abusing them from playing. A lot of the problem players I personally know aren't interested in Core and will be sticking to non-Core (do we have a name for non-Core?). For me, that's working as intended.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be blunt, that particular option is so good, that some summoner players kinda resent having it. If they don't cast haste... well apparently they are doing something wrong :(
This is a more general problem. "What? A wizard without Enlarge Person prepared?" Etc. There are a few options that are so good (or, at least, so useful to the rest of the party) that everybody else assumes that you're playing your character wrong if you aren't spamming them. (The CLW wand is in the same category, only that's become de rigeur for everybody because it's such a great value. It's like having pants on.)
What's odd is that we have these social expectations to be playing your character maximally efficiently... and, then, at the same time, we have GMs complaining about parties that stomp scenarios without much challenge, and parties complaining about most scenarios being too easy (with some exceptions, like (say) Bonekeep). Given the latter, you'd think that at least as a community we'd realize that it's OK not to have perfectly optimized characters, and to have a bit of fun with character concepts, and to stop talking about how everybody must "carry their weight in combat". Sure, you want your character to be effective, but that's different from doing the absolute best thing at all times.
|
|
I don't think anyone's arguing that powerful/overpowered/broken options don't exist in Core.
I think the general idea is that the lack of additional broken options will deter the playerbase prone to abusing them from playing. A lot of the problem players I personally know aren't interested in Core and will be sticking to non-Core (do we have a name for non-Core?). For me, that's working as intended.
I think the name for non-Core is "Pathfinder Society". I.e., it's the same as all along. Without a qualifier, it's the standard campaign.
To be talking about Core, you have to explicitly say "Pathfinder Society Core Campaign".
|
|
Mike Brock posted somewhere the official names.
If I recall correctly, it was as follows:
"Pathfinder Society Normal Mode"
"Pathfinder Society Core Mode"
EDIT LINK
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be blunt, that particular option is so good, that some summoner players kinda resent having it. If they don't cast haste... well apparently they are doing something wrong :(This is a more general problem. "What? A wizard without Enlarge Person prepared?" Etc. There are a few options that are so good (or, at least, so useful to the rest of the party) that everybody else assumes that you're playing your character wrong if you aren't spamming them. (The CLW wand is in the same category, only that's become de rigeur for everybody because it's such a great value. It's like having pants on.)
What's odd is that we have these social expectations to be playing your character maximally efficiently... and, then, at the same time, we have GMs complaining about parties that stomp scenarios without much challenge, and parties complaining about most scenarios being too easy (with some exceptions, like (say) Bonekeep). Given the latter, you'd think that at least as a community we'd realize that it's OK not to have perfectly optimized characters, and to have a bit of fun with character concepts, and to stop talking about how everybody must "carry their weight in combat". Sure, you want your character to be effective, but that's different from doing the absolute best thing at all times.
This is so right on, and it's the reason I have a big problem with the creation of Core Campaign. It sends the wrong message. In a way, it's a huge capitulation. How can the correct approach to power creep be for Paizo to say, implicitly, as they have now done, "Sorry, we were wrong to create 90% of our products in the first place and by buying them you wasted your money getting ever more involved in a game that was becoming gradually unplayable in a way we knew would happen and chose to do nothing about"? This is crazy.
The solution is and has always been some kind of elastic system of challenge determination. To Paizo's credit they have slightly touched on this with the reluctant addition of "hard modes" in some of the PFS mods. But it's absolutely wild to me that it's been like pulling teeth getting them to make even that small concession to common sense. It's this glaring obvious problem that people have been talking about forever, and when Paizo finally decides to deal with it, their solution is to graciously allow us to not use most of the stuff we bought from them.
And in the process we lose any hope of seeing a widespread adoption within PFS of the simple formula that rknop has just articulated, which should have been SOP all along. To paraphrase: "Stop optimizing past the point of basic effectiveness and have a bit of fun with character concepts."
Edit: I should say that I theoretically don't have any problem with Core Campaign and in fact heartily support it, if and only if it's not going to be their only solution to this issue. But it seems like they've just kind of thrown up their hands and taken a hammer to the problem rather than a much called-for scalpel.
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I should say that I theoretically don't have any problem with Core Campaign and in fact heartily support it, if and only if it's not going to be their only solution to this issue. But it seems like they've just kind of thrown up their hands and taken a hammer to the problem rather than a much called-for scalpel.
I think you may be underestimating how many people truly enjoy having the limitless options that Paizo has published. At this point there is almost no concept or creation that cannot be made in the PFRPG, and this company has been very successful providing that customization angle to its customers.
Taking it away from the many, many people who play PFS would cause an outcry that would drown out what Obiwan felt after Alderan was destroyed.
The Core Campaign allows PFS leadership the ability to hit the "reset" button for all of those who DON'T like that many options. Thus, two customer bases who are completely at odds with each other are made happy.
Sure, there is a subset of people who are bummed that they don't get to replay everything with all those options at their disposal, others are bummed that not enough toys were taken away, and still more are worried that the Core Campaign is more accurately named The Doom Of PFS And The Deathknell Of The PFRPG.
But I've never seen any one decision not have its detractors.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And in the process we lose any hope of seeing a widespread adoption within PFS of the simple formula that rknop has just articulated, which should have been SOP all along. To paraphrase: "Stop optimizing past the point of basic effectiveness and have a bit of fun with character concepts."
I would love it if this was possible but there's a pretty vocal chunk of the community that's only having fun if they're optimizing to the 11th degree and for years now we've been telling them that's okay - some even encourage it. These types of players aren't going anywhere. It's a bit ham-fisted but I think Core is the best solution for now, creating an environment that the worst optimizers aren't interested in so the rest of us can play the game in peace.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is getting seriously toxic. OF course given the subject that was inevitable. The OP may not have meant it to be but this subject was a nuke waiting to happen. Wanting more options does not make me an optimizer. I've played with all kinds. For people like me more options means a better chance that my bizarre concept can be played out reasonably effectively. For people who get off on being douchebags, more options is just more ways to be douchey. Core Mode doesn't fix douchebags, and it was, according "Official Statements(tm)" it was never meant to. Core Mode simplifies entry, minimizing what you need to have to have all of the options that everyone else is playing with.
I'm still not a fan of Core Mode, I've played out my ideas that can be encompassed in that book. I still have my concerns that it may affect some people's ability to find a table. But I hope it works out exactly as Mike and Co. planned. People having expectations that it is this solution to douchebags is more likely to kill it in the long run, than anything else I can imagine.
If Nicolaz convinces his daughter to come back for a Core Mode game, and she ends up playing with a douche, a perfectly reasonable expectation, because plenty of douchey players will be playing Core Mode, then she will likely walk away and never come back, because douchey players don't need options to be douchey, and her likely "one more chance" at this will be probably be ruined, and don't fool yourselves into thinking it won't because it will. Maybe not to Nicolaz's daughter, maybe he will get lucky and his daughter will get to play with nicer people this time and several times after. But it will happen. And if we convince people to come back on the basis that they won't have to deal with douchey players then we are selling them a lie.
Nicolaz, good luck finding a table your daughter enjoys, we need more young gamers, especially female gamers, and Paizo is a great company for them to see, because it shows so well that women can and do belong and thrive in gaming.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How are you getting 6d8 in melee - especially at Level 6?Magic. ;)
What spell?
I think you need to post this build.
|
|
I should say that I theoretically don't have any problem with Core Campaign and in fact heartily support it, if and only if it's not going to be their only solution to this issue. But it seems like they've just kind of thrown up their hands and taken a hammer to the problem rather than a much called-for scalpel.I think you may be underestimating how many people truly enjoy having the limitless options that Paizo has published. At this point there is almost no concept or creation that cannot be made in the PFRPG, and this company has been very successful providing that customization angle to its customers...
The Core Campaign allows PFS leadership the ability to hit the "reset" button for all of those who DON'T like that many options. Thus, two customer bases who are completely at odds with each other are made happy.
The thing is, I think you (and Paizo) are misidentifying the groups involved in this ideological conflict, and thereby misidentifying the problem. As far as I know, there is no significant body of players that do not like having options. They make not like some of the results of having options, and they may not like some of the specific options available, but the idea of options in and of itself is objectionable to very few PFS players. If we wanted balance at the expense of customization, we could just play 5th edition.
Now, as I said there are many people who do not like certain specific options that are currently available. Broadly speaking, these fall into the following groups:
1- The anti funky-stuff group (mostly this means technology and Eastern/anime inspired stuff).
2- The anti optimization group.
3- The anti caster group.
The first group does not like anything in their game that isn't a staple of what they consider "classic" fantasy. The second group doesn't like anything "OP" in the game (this includes, but is not limited to, everything so strong that everyone uses it). The third group just plain doesn't like spellcasting.
So, from here we begin to see the way to actually give people what they want. The idea of a new campaign mode that eliminates certain options is the right one. The idea of eliminating "everything but Core" is ludicrously arbitrary. There are just not many people who dislike, as a rule, as a concept, everything not in the Core rulebook. I mean, it's just a silly idea, not to mention the added problem that it renders obsolete virtually everything many of us have purchased from Paizo. Instead of Core Campaign, create something like the following:
1- The Classic Fantasy Campaign: roughly speaking, this is a campaign with no guns, Gunslingers, ki pools, Eastern weapons or non-core races.
2- The Challenging Campaign: in this campaign several things currently available to PFS players are banned. To get some idea of what would be on the chopping block, simply peruse this thread.
3- The Martial Campaign: in this campaign, all spellcasting is banned for PCs.
Now obviously these are only extremely rough outlines that would need to be fleshed out extensively, but you get the idea. This way, you still allow extensive customization options to everyone who wants them (i.e. almost everyone), but you also address the actual, specific needs of the community's various demographics.
Another nice thing about these campaigns is that they create more specific implicit rules for the community about what to bring to the table. Sure, there's nothing to prevent you from making a Rogue in a Classic Campaign and giving it ninja style fluff. But if you do this, you are obviously and explicitly going against the spirit of the campaign, and can easily be called out for it. Ditto for those who still find ways to mega optimize in Challenging Campaign.
Core Campaign holds no appeal to me whatsoever, beyond the opportunity to just play more games in general. But if that's all I'm looking for, I'll probably devote my time and energy to checking out 5E organized play.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Word has reached me through the Grand Lodge that there is a decidedly negative opinion about rogues and Core only monks that has been circulating Absalom. While I believe we are all entitled to our opinion and free to speak our mind, I feel compelled to provide my own experiences as a pupil of the Master of Masters.
Thus far, after being assigned active field duty, I have completed several successful adventures, most while being accompanied by a ranger or two, as well as our rogue. I've only traveled with a druid on two occasions thus far, and the only wizard I know of is the rogue I mentioned earlier, Gleery. He has plans to become an arcane trickster.
Although I am sure there are other Pathfinders that exist whose combat prowess far surpasses our own, we have used our basic training as Pathfinders to our advantage, remembering to Cooperate in every combat situation.
In short, I've traveled the northern wilds of Irrisen and the blistering heat of the Mwangi Expanse, I've uncovered fiendish machinations brewing in the Blakros Museum and disbanded cultists forming beneath Cassomir's sewers.
Feel free to view my chronicles yourselves as evidence of these events, as is your right as fellow Pathfinders.
----------------------------------------------
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is getting seriously toxic. OF course given the subject that was inevitable. The OP may not have meant it to be but this subject was a nuke waiting to happen. Wanting more options does not make me an optimizer. I've played with all kinds. For people like me more options means a better chance that my bizarre concept can be played out reasonably effectively. For people who get off on being douchebags, more options is just more ways to be douchey. Core Mode doesn't fix douchebags, and it was, according "Official Statements(tm)" it was never meant to. Core Mode simplifies entry, minimizing what you need to have to have all of the options that everyone else is playing with.
I'm still not a fan of Core Mode, I've played out my ideas that can be encompassed in that book. I still have my concerns that it may affect some people's ability to find a table. But I hope it works out exactly as Mike and Co. planned. People having expectations that it is this solution to douchebags is more likely to kill it in the long run, than anything else I can imagine.
If Nicolaz convinces his daughter to come back for a Core Mode game, and she ends up playing with a douche, a perfectly reasonable expectation, because plenty of douchey players will be playing Core Mode, then she will likely walk away and never come back, because douchey players don't need options to be douchey, and her likely "one more chance" at this will be probably be ruined, and don't fool yourselves into thinking it won't because it will. Maybe not to Nicolaz's daughter, maybe he will get lucky and his daughter will get to play with nicer people this time and several times after. But it will happen. And if we convince people to come back on the basis that they won't have to deal with douchey players then we are selling them a lie.
Nicolaz, good luck finding a table your daughter enjoys, we need more young gamers, especially female gamers, and Paizo is a great company for them to see, because it shows so well...
I agree with almost everything in this post, with one small exception:
I'm a fan of core mode to see how I can get the crazy concepts I have done with just the core options. It's almost too easy nowadays to get a crazy concept working :)|
Venture-Captain, Germany–Hannover
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think you need to post this build.I respectfully disagree.
Well done!
Perhaps there can be a new culture of not posting and boasting about the strongest build that makes the most damage and is essentially a one person army with no need of companions.
That might just encourage people to actually read the CRB and come up with their own stuff.
Said elven rapier fighter could just be effective enough with a cooperating team. Same as rogues and monks can be quite effective.
One shoting encounters will happen in core too with the right (or wrong) characters. Only that solo attitude makes for suboptimal experiences there. And even if your PC is strong enough to finish the encounter alone, there is no need to do so.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
The thing is, I think you (and Paizo) are misidentifying the groups involved in this ideological conflict, and thereby misidentifying the problem.
Okay. We all get to have our opinions. At this point we just need to wait and see what happens.
|
|
The thing is, I think you (and Paizo) are misidentifying the groups involved in this ideological conflict, and thereby misidentifying the problem.Okay. We all get to have our opinions. At this point we just need to wait and see what happens.
Yeah, God knows I could be wrong. I just know what makes sense to me, and for the purpose of argument I state it as though I'm totally confident in it.
|
|
...
None of this is surprising to me. People that complain about Monks and Rogues are complaining that they are weak relative to the other classes, not relative to the challenges presented by CR. This dichotomy of thought has always been the trouble, really.
Of course you do fine as a Monk or Rogue in PFS mods, especially in early seasons. They are so easy that nearly anything can perform adequately against them. And this is the problem. How do we have a campaign that suits your "general...non-twink" Monk and also suits even semi optimized builds, and even non optimized full casters, all of whom will outperform you?
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
None of this is surprising to me. People that complain about Monks and Rogues are complaining that they are weak relative to the other classes, not relative to the challenges presented by CR. This dichotomy of thought has always been the trouble, really.Of course you do fine as a Monk or Rogue in PFS mods, especially in early seasons. They are so easy that nearly anything can perform adequately against them.
We have had plenty of challenges in the adventures I've taken part in, despite the "earliness of the season" as you put it. Perhaps you are unaware, or are forgetting, several difficult fights present in my earlier adventures. Fights against multiple huecuva, or against a charging, mounted cavalier with a lance, or against some strange being capable of binding an outsider to her very will! She is surely not of this world. Not to mention the slew of evil clerics that channel their sinful deity into your flesh, causing it to writhe and burn, as if you are being drenched in acid. We have narrowly escaped death several times, yet through cooperation we have triumphed.
Still though, if you doubt the capabilities of my team, please have a word with some of the Venture Officers in the Grand Lodge and request us to be assigned to a more challenging mission. Currently, our schedule is rather booked. We are to investigate more troubling reports emanating from the Blakros Museum, and then head to Osirion in order to help the Sapphire Sage recover a lost gem of sorts. These tasks will take us several weeks of adventuring, and likely hone our skills quite a bit.
And this is the problem. How do we have a campaign that suits your "general...non-twink" Monk and also suits even semi optimized builds, and even non optimized full casters, all of whom will outperform you?
I do not see a problem. Myself and other agents are sent on assignment, work together as a team, succeed and report our findings. If other agents are more capable than myself and my colleagues and also succeed on their missions, why is this an issue for the Society? I would prefer the Grand Lodge to recruit the best of the best. There is much knowledge hidden away in the recesses of this world and without skilled agents we risk it being lost for all time.
If you, as a fellow agent, are feeling overshadowed by others on your future assignments, I'd suggest conversing with them and explaining at such. Surely part of cooperation is communication, and how can we expect to work well together if we aren't honest with one another.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having sat at a table of CORE I can say my fears are true. This is hard mode. This may be cheaper for new players, but it also is harder to survive. My wife and I had made a fighter and a rogue. The other players were a druid and a pre gen Seoni. The other players were brand new and 1 week of PFS experience. We were almost TPK'd twice and only good luck saved us. This was caused mostly by the GM (who had never run before) not understanding that a 1-5 with no wand of CLW in the party is really difficult. This isn't how it goes with new players in the normal campaign.
The CORE campaign works well as hard mode but it greatly reduces the ability of more experienced players to help the new players succeed and learn. I don't like having to explain in the middle of combat that we are all about to die because those zombies have 12hp and half the party is down and we are out of healing and nobody does more than 1d6+3 damage. I don't like having to choose between rudely telling other players what has the best chance of avoiding a TPK or keeping silent and ensuring it.
For something that was billed as not needing to optimize to have fun I have had the opposite experience.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What scenario did you participate in Gregory? Also, did the GM have time to prep the scenario ahead of time or were they running cold?
I ask because my experience has been entirely different. Some situations have been challenging, but no more so than regular PFS games.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nili! What a wonderful thing to see you at the lodge for once and not called out to venture on a mission together. It’s a great thing to be able to relax in the safety of Absalom for once—but what our fellow pathfinders are saying bothers me as well. Our pathfinder society sends us on hard missions, expecting us to do the impossible and break through despite the difficulty involved. If not for their newest recruitment regime I may very well be still making small coins by pointing out flaws in the work of others. I dare say I actually enjoy the thrill of working the dangerous assessments I am now participating in.
Others here are arguing those agents not trained specifically for one task are inadequate to accomplish it, but I beg to differ. My trainer in the lodge could have easily let me focus on honing my spirit to raise my spellcasting power, but instead he let me take on multiple roles but allowing me to also train as an archer. I may not be the best of both worlds, but I hope it’s wrong for me to question that as a Bard and not a Fighter or Ranger or trying to use a bow I have been less useful to my companions.
Having sat at a table of CORE I can say my fears are true. This is hard mode. This may be cheaper for new players, but it also is harder to survive. My wife and I had made a fighter and a rogue. The other players were a druid and a pre gen Seoni. The other players were brand new and 1 week of PFS experience. We were almost TPK'd twice and only good luck saved us. This was caused mostly by the GM (who had never run before) not understanding that a 1-5 with no wand of CLW in the party is really difficult. This isn't how it goes with new players in the normal campaign.
The CORE campaign works well as hard mode but it greatly reduces the ability of more experienced players to help the new players succeed and learn. I don't like having to explain in the middle of combat that we are all about to die because those zombies have 12hp and half the party is down and we are out of healing and nobody does more than 1d6+3 damage. I don't like having to choose between rudely telling other players what has the best chance of avoiding a TPK or keeping silent and ensuring it.
For something that was billed as not needing to optimize to have fun I have had the opposite experience.
Sounds like a conglomeration of bad luck, frankly (the GM never having run before is a biggie). I think they should have a third category of groups, then: 1) Core Rules 2) Normal 3) New Players, Core (not open to people who have PFS credit, at the least). That way, the GM knows what to expect (folks not necessarily up on even the Core rules), the brand-new players (such as the 13-year-old Elven Fighter in her first game; hope she and her dad stick with us, despite everything! :)) can breathe easy that they won't be completely overwhelmed out of eminently curable ignorance (ignorance is nothing to be ashamed of, and can be cured. Willful ignorance, on the other hand...), and hopefully the GM him/herself will be experienced enough to be able to help new folks walk through it. I completely agree with many a poster, here; we should be encouraging new players, not douche-bagging them away at the door. This is pen-n-paper, folks, not a computer game...or for that matter, even old-school Champions (now just part of the HERO System), where people could cram a 500-point build into a 250-point limit game. :-/
Lady Bluehawk
who just does home games, where we have many sources and house rules, and even then, they're things we don't care for and won't play with (Gunslingers, Oracles, and Summoners being among them. Haven't tried Alchemists or Cavaliers yet, but the latter seem pretty useless if they don't have access to a mount; in that case, I think Small size Cavaliers would be better off; it's easier convincing your riding dog to come with you in a dungeon than a heavy war horse...) ;->
|
I would have said four brand new level 1 PCs in a normal 1 to 5 _is_ hard mode.
no CLW
only 4 PCs so less action economy
Encounter CR is maximum difference it can be from _all_ PCs
several scenarios don't scale to 4 PCs well (if at all)
smaller parties are more likely to have a poor scenario "fit"
brand new players rarely make good use of their PCs abilities or use good tactics
Is CORE bringing an additional and significant penalty above and beyond the above?
EDIT: ah I think I see, the GM is new because CORE has encouraged him to GM. So yes "new GM" might be a significant factor though that risk is not CORE specific.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
This was caused mostly by the GM (who had never run before) not understanding that a 1-5 with no wand of CLW in the party is really difficult. This isn't how it goes with new players in the normal campaign.
I can kinda agree regarding the rest of your post, but how is the availability or lack of the mandatory wand of CLW the fault of the GM?
My home group recently learned, that saving PP is a very bad idea (The Dissapeared) and that group consists of nothing but ACG classes. Groups with a combination of new players, pregens, characters without prior chronicles and maybe sub-optimal party composition will quite often have problems.
CORE isn't really the culprit here (other than the fact that some builds just don't work very well in CORE).
|
|
I don't want to give people the wrong idea about the session I was in. I understand a lot of it was bad luck. I understand that it would have been almost as hard in normal mode (mostly due to a lack of CLW), though it is one of those things that is impossible to know. We survived and even got 1 prestige, though we still can't get any cure wands. It was Frozen Fingers of Midnight and I was helping the GM convert from 3.5 to PF on the fly during the session. I had never played it before or I would have recommended he start on something like Wounded Wisp or Confirmation.
We had fun, both new players said they intend to come back. Me, my wife and another veteran player have all volunteered to rotate GM duties so nobody gets stuck doing it all the time. I was commenting mostly on the difficulty increase. Having the experienced players with martials and the new players with the casters sure didn't help anything either. My wife spending 90% of the session unconscious because of an axe crit really didn't help anything either.