Cyrus007's page

Thank you for all of the replies. Sorry to have taken time to respond, but I was sick for a bit. I will look into all of the suggestions people have left. Again, I really appreciate all of the responses and comments.

This is why I love this forum. So many great people taking their time to answer questions and giving great advice. Thank you again everyone.

Thank you for all of the feedback. I will pass it along. I really appreciate it.

Have fun everyone.

Hello Everyone,

I just wanted to quickly make some observations and comments on the state of PF1, and a hope for PF2. First, role-playing has been my hobby of choice for 40 years. In that time, I have played in an incalculable number of game systems. As far as PF1 is concerned, Paizo has created an engaging and exciting game system-I greatly admire and respect everything that they have done with this system. Many thanks to them, especially for their creative output and I greatly thank them for the Adventure Paths.

However, it my belief that PF1 now is in the same dilemma as what 3.5 was in at its end; a system that is very unbalanced in which power creep has warped the overall game system. For example, I run AP's and in the last AP chapter I ran, I saw 9th level players make DC:60 rolls and hitting AC:30+ creatures for over 300 hps. in one round, and that was on a bad day. In fact, my players are begging me to triple or quadruple the hps of the monsters. In addition, my players are not power players per se, but just working people that enjoy playing. Now Hero Lab (which I really like for its utilitarian value) has helped them a lot to manage their characters. Nevertheless, PF1 is no longer a challenging, nor by approximation, an exciting game system-and I know most of all the tricks and creative ways to make an encounter more engaging and difficult. The characters are just so powerful that the players are not exited nor challenged by the listed opponent(s) that they face.

Therefore, my hope and advise to Paizo is that they take their time and carefully release PF2 with the goal to both entertain, but to challenge the players. I have seen comments on the forums that the monsters in PF2 (which I play tested) were too difficult. My suggestion is to not water down the monsters and to keep as they are, or to make it possible to easily adjust them to fit the play styles of individual game tables. As a gaming axiom, the more difficult and clever the monsters are, the sweeter is the victory in the end. Character deaths, which are not welcomed, must be allowed to happen from time- to-time to reinforce the sense of risk, and therefore, excitement of the game. My hope is that PF2 is enjoyable, challenging, exciting, balanced, and easy to learn.

In conclusion, many thanks to the staff at Paizo and to the PF2 play testers. I am really eager for PF2 to be released.

P.S. I really hope Paizo continues to release Adventure Paths. The APs are really a godsend to working adults that don't have the time to create adventures on their own. Overall, they have been exceptional and very fun to play. My only comment is that a stronger editorial presence is maintained for all 6 of the AP chapters in order to maintain both the continuity structure and qualitative aspect of the AP. The narrative thread of any multiple part story must be carefully maintained within the different parts in order to sustain the fundamental coherence of the story.

Thank you and please have a great gaming year.

2 max damage attacks from a goblin with a dogslicer will leave basically anyone except a wizard still standing in PF1 too. It's a very low damage weapon and goblins don't have a particularly good str.

Um...are not Goblins good guys now? Must have been a splinter group, perhaps disaffected with having a change to their bad guys status. I imagine it was much the same for the poor Gnomes in 4th ed. D & D who went from good guys to villains. Ah, those were dark days for the Gnomish race...I blame the Dwarves for that debacle.

While I suppose there's probably some reason mechanically that sneaking characters shouldn't get +2 to hit on one attack, thematically this just feels bad to play.

When the rogue spends time sneaking up on someone and then doesn't get to sneak attack then, the result of the rogue player is confusion and disappointment.

You should be able to sneak attack by sneaking and then attacking.

I could not agree more. Since D & D 1st edition, the rogue's signature ability was to sneak up to a target and back stab his opponent. It is a iconic element of the class. Although I understand the many ways a rogue can sneak attack a target in PF, why not just include backstabbing an opponent from stealth again?; especially now that there is a new edition coming out.

In my mind, the two classes are so similar, especially in the spell casting area, that I don’t known why one would opt to play a sorcerer. The two classes need to be delineated in much more specific ways.

As I saw it, in PF1, it was very nicely balanced between brawn vs precision-in magical casting terms. Besides the sorcerer being able to encroach on other spell casters magical traditions, the sorcerer seems very bland. I would prefer that they go back with being able to cast more but knowing less spells, than how the class is formulated now.

The class is in a very unfinished form and Paizo needs to do more work on it.

Hi,

I agree with everyone's very thoughtful and logical critique of the new 2nd ed. rule set. However, I really like how they have tried to tackle the power creep issue with the game. In fact, the power creep in 1st ed. has become such issue with me that I'm no longer motivated to play anymore. Therefore, I find the general philosophy in 2nd edition, which seems to try to address this issue, a very welcomed change.

Have a fun everyone.

Hi,

First of all, I want to thank Paizo for really making a terrific game. I have been involved with role-playing games for 40 years and I have played many games in that time. Paizo has really done a very good job at making their game system fun and exciting to play, esp. the APs.

Nevertheless, as it is inevitable in most game systems, with the ineluctable publish or perish axiom for game companies, the game has become very wonky and unbalanced. When a mid-level character can easily do over a 100 hit points of damage in a round, or have skills in the upper 20 region, if not higher, a GM really can't do a lot to consistently challenge players which does not become repetitive.

Therefore, having just bought the new 2nd edition Pathfinder rulebook, I want tip my hat at what I see as Paizo creative attempt with curtailing the power creep in the game. Although I am still analyzing the new system, I find Pathfinder 2nd ed. to be a much more balanced and broadly designed system than what the state of the game is now. I think it will challenge players in a way that will make the game more exciting and interesting to play, e.g., I hope most skills DC's will become appropriate for the players level and that fights do not last just 1 or 2 rounds-although I am not championing for the horrendously long fights that typified 4th edition D & D.

In the end, I want to thank the game designers, the playtesters, and the staff at Paizo for making what I hope will be a challenging, fun, exciting, and balanced new edition of Pathfinder. I was becoming burned out with the game and now I see a very bright glimmer of hope on the horizon!

Thank you. Have fun everyone.

Hi,

I want to thank everyone for their input. I just wanted to get a more thorough understanding of this in PFS. I find these boards to be very helpful and there are really very nice people contributing to this hobby, so thanks again.

Have a great week!