No it wont. I forget the exact numbers, but a while ago someone put together a stat for the number of goblins a 1st level fighter could kill on average if they come 1 at a time by edition. 1st and second edition it was somewhere between 1 and 2. In 3rd it increased to over 2 and 3.5 went up a little more. Pathfinder increased to just over 3. In 4th it was over 20. The numbers rebalancing completely changes the type of story an encounter is.
Heh. I well remember one of my first forays into playing (1st edition) D&D. We, the party of six, were standing on the wall of the town looking out at the army of 100,000 orcs surrounding it. The GM asked "what do you want to do?" Immediate reaction from a couple of fighters: "We fight!" So he had the town guard open the gate enough for us to slip out into the middle of all those orcs. A couple of die rolls later and it was "fight's over, you won". Plus an immediate jump from first level (!) to third. :-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know if its time for a new edition of Pathfinder but I'm starting to feel like the newer classes have left me feeling rather cold about the current direction of PF. Furthermore in running my Mummy's Mask game I'm finding a party with a Warpreist, Psychic, Summoner, Kineticist, Magus, and Sorceror have completely overwhelmed the encounters as written and now require extensive rewrites on my part to attempt to create a challenge.
You realize that the newer classes are weaker on average than the ones previous, especially with occult adventures. Psychic is the weakest 9th caster and kineticist is the weakest class in your listed party, while Summoner and Sorcerer have been known as immensely powerful for years and years. This is not about new classes....
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The position I have is, if there will be a new version, why stop short and just do a basic clean up?
If something is gonna get done, go all out and do it right.
Reprints already "fix" things that have slipped through here and there. Stealth has gone through some changes that seem like a brand new rule from what was in the first printing.
My overall feeling is that the setting will continue to thrive when the shoe drops and an update is proffered.
|
|
That can be done without having a "new" version of the game. A split of the Core rulebook for Characters vs. Items. (we already have an Ultimate Equipment) Further Unchained books. A basic book to compliment the Strategy Guide. A compilation book of a some of the early 3.5/OGL content in a hardback.
These can be done, but it isn't a "2nd Edition." We already have, in PFS, a replacement for the very much broken Summoner.
My point is that a new version isn't gonna be just a restructuring of the current standard, nor will it become something completely alien that it becomes a completely different game.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Frankly I don't have a very good impression with this Pathfinder 2nd edition: From what I saw, they seemed to have made changes "just for change sake".
In the latest releases, Paizo seemed to have produced unpolished products (i.e., Ultimate Wilderness) and to have been quite uncaring about "patching them up" just with the "excuse" that they are "spread too thin" with Starfinder.
Really there is no need to make a "revolutionary" product when Paizo falls short even on the "incremental" ones...
Seems really just an easy way to make quick cash at expenses of Pathfinder players while providing lower quality unpolished products...
In fact, Paizo is "shapeshifting" into WOTC!
Skarm
No matter how you justify it, 2nd Edition, 5th Edition, 10th Edition, it will still end up bloated over years of supplements and new expansions. No publisher can get away with this cycle of doom.
I can see Paizo moving towards "milking its fans pocket this time" than sticking to their commitment that made them better than D&D!
Ugh, let this sad thread stay dead, please.
Ugh, let this sad thread stay dead, please.
I will be closed soon enough, don't worry.