Mockery

still not Gortle's page

4 posts. Alias of DonMoody.


RSS


1 person marked this as a favorite.
magnuskn wrote:
AceofMoxen wrote:
I think this is a misrepresentation of what happened. Pf1e sales dropped. The players were the ones who put 3.5 back in the trash. Paizo had to do something to avoid going out of business.
Because the system was becoming bloated. Another revision more in the style of 3.5 -> PF1E would have been welcomed by people like me, who are now not buying PF2E products.

tru dat, continuing the 3e flame would have been welcomed by many

even if it involved significant rationalization and revision (by even more if it did)


Fumarole wrote:
Verzen wrote:
The math is broken in the game.
I am curious what levels you've played through before reaching this conclusion. Or is this all white room theorizing?

current is an L1 - L19 run, which will include (barring another TPK, which will cause part of the crew to cache this out) L20 sometime this quarter

which is champion though over the past three years, the mix has included a variety
wizard, witch, swashbuckler, rogue, ranger, monk, fighter cleric, bard, alchemist


CorvusMask wrote:
I'm confused of whats up with poster who has multiple Aliases that are variants of statements of "not Gortle" …

it’s an homage to Gortle

but yeah, I know a lotta peeps ain’t into homages


2 people marked this as a favorite.
WWHsmackdown wrote:
.....but the math is the absolute LAST thing in the game that would be broken. It was made with the help of a computer science major.

Apparently not one that understood variability or probability in general.

The underlying math is foundationally flawed.
For example, the discrete probability distribution is off - badly.
Off as in [yes, the following is anecdotal, yet I dare you to to the full math or run a simulator hundreds of thousands of times and then you’ll know] more character death and TPKs in the past three years than in the decades before that.
All but all via the RNG, not poor player choices or the like.
This is a problem which I doubt will ever be addressed (because it’s so inherent and, well, foundational - it requires not some ‘remodeling’ but a complete removal of the structure, in its entirety, so there is nothing left, then rebuilt starting with pouring concrete; ok, that was some hyperbole yet only a modicum exaggerated).

That said, I do agree second edition is ‘more stable’ at high level play than first edition.
But that’s a rather low bar given how unstable PF1e was at teen levels.

PF2e has some very nice aspects. But also has some major flaws (one of which is the developers refusing to answer questions of what they meant when they wrote a rule).
More so than PF1e? Maybe, maybe not. Opinions vary.
But mostly it’s jus not traditional Pathfinder, aka the game that took & kept the 3.5 torch alive, it’s different. Not better, not worse, jus different.

And for what’s it’s worth, I loved Paizo because they saved 3.5 - yet then sometime later decided this really did belong in the trash bin which is where they [wrongly, so very very wrongly] tossed it. And when Paizo did that, the good will I had for them they also tossed in the trash heap.
After which I view them based solely on their achievements, without a savior nostalgia lens.
Which, sadly, are as lacking as their math in PF2e.