Phantasmist wrote:
A series of questions for people who like the new game and general direction paizo's team is taking it. But, before that I want people to give an honest answer without interference, so no judgement please. Likewise I'm mainly going to be viewing peoples responses, so I'm not going commenting on anything unless people need clarification on a question. Also, the reason I'm asking is because I don't like the direction the new game is going. Despite that I'm just curious as to what people like about and where they might be coming from. I want less drama and more understanding, so here we go.
1. Do you currently like pathfinder 1e? (I know it sounds loaded, but please bare with me.)
2. Did you once like pathfinder 1e but now find it troublesome? (feel free to give details.)
3. Do you like 4th or 5th edition D&D? (Also sounds loaded but again no judgments)
4. Which are you looking for class balance, smoother high level play, more options, or even all of those things? (Small edit: these weren't meant to be mutually excursive, I just want the gist of what you're looking for, feel free to add additional thoughts/desires as well.)
5. How do you feel about making the game more accessible in general?
6. Are you willing to give up on accessibility if you can still gain all of the benefits listed in question 4?
7. Would you be willing to play an alternative rules system then what we have been presented? (A different version of pathfinder 2nd edition if you will).
8. And if you said yes to the above question what would you like to see in that theoretical game? (Most of you will see what I'm doing here, I'm finding common ground)
1.- Yes, It's currently my favorite d20 game.
2.- I've always known the game isn't perfect, but I don't exactly find it "Troublesome" I do understand that some people do find it that specifically because of how complex it is and how much the game grew beyond how it was at first.
3.- That is a hard question to answer... First: What is a 4th? ;) Second: I immediately saw the potential in 5th, and that potential is exactly my problem with it. I love how amazing 5th could be, but sadly it will take a long time (I think) for it to become as good as it could. I just think the devs might have forgotten to actually finish the game...
4.- Another hard question to answer... I like long campaigns, with characters I can grow over time and end up playing as high-level badasses. I don't know about balance, but I feel like every class should feel powerful or at least fun enough to play.
5.- I don't think making the game more accessible is a bad thing, as long as the game is still fun. I don't think it should be dumbed down, but I like optimization. Complicated games can be fun if they're complicated for a good reason, if it adds depth to the game while remaining fun. The moment it becomes bad, is when you're rolling 1d1000000 to see if you're a freak of nature. I can see where people come from when they say Pathfinder 1e is not a good starter RPG. I started with 3.5, so I think it's great, but if making it simpler will attract more people, as long as the game is still fun, I'm okay with it.
6.- If I had to press one of two buttons... Yes, because I'm nice, but I'm also selfish.
7.-Sure! It's only a playtest! First look I gave the book, I was horribly disappointed, and I thought I'd hate it, but after a bit, everything started making sense and I started seeing a potentially fun game in there, that I'm expecting to change and improve until it releases. It'd be a shame for me if they changed things like the Action Economy or other small details that I've liked, because I feel that's the gimmick of this edition in particular, and I rather like it... But I signed up for this to be up for whatever.
8.- Make it fun, make it cool, make it flashy, make it make sense, and by all the gods make the spells a bit better! :p
Hope it helps
