Let me first say I LOVE the Pathfinder RPG and Jason you and Paizo have done a great job and thank you for keeping third edition DND alive!
Now for my question has Pathfinder gone “Soft” on the PCs lets take a look. I don’t think the increases to the races or the classes are really signs of going soft they had a goal and they stuck with it make core classes worth taking and staying in for all 20 levels. Let’s look at some of the things that I have seen here on the boards and with my players as the game going “Soft” on the PCs
Extra Hit points for the PCs, I don’t really see this as a bad thing it helps with early survivability (which is important) some players in my group really didn’t like this one but most people I have read of talked to liked this one
Channel Energy/ Extra Healing I think this gives the PCs a lot of extra healing that makes a lot of encounters less challenging, instead of having to conserve spells and abilities and fight tactically characters can storm in a blow all there spells cause all the cleric has to do is burn some turns and with are all healed again. Mass cure light wounds was a fifth level spell now 3rd level clerics can do a mass cure light wounds with a use of his channel energy.
Ease of Raising the Dead now it is much less costly to your character to be raised from the dead get a non permanent negative level. While I don’t see this as a bad thing it is “Softer” on the PCs then before.
Limiting some powerful spells, the first one is the nerfing of mages disjunction this was one of the few spells all PCs feared because all there items were in danger. Now there is not that same danger it’s an encounter maybe two and there items are back, it’s a 9th level spell it should do major things, a few PCs might get mad they lose and item or two but with out real danger what is the fun.
This brings me to one of the major things that really got me going, which is the limiting of the Save of Die Spells. I really liked save of dies as a PC and a DM you must fear them if your character is not threatened and have a challenge to keep going then what’s the big deal about having a 20th level character I could go on and on about the save or dies but I wont.
Another thing that is the change to DR where a certain plus of a weapon overcomes different DR’s . Now the challenge of some of the monsters goes down when you throw a monster with 10DR (for something you know as the DM they cant overcome) you make that a very good encounter with a little weaker monster Now I just have my + 4 sword and DR no longer matters to me, more in my opinion of making the game “Soft” for the PCs
So that is my rant about Pathfinder RPG am I totally alone on this I really would like everyone’s thoughts on this including yours Jason
To quote my players
“If there is no danger, why play and brag about having high level guys.”
It's a mixed bag for me.
Extra hit points I don't like, but I like the change to death being at -constitution instead of -10.
Channel Energy I really like. Conserving resources is fine and something I do enjoy about D&D, but when a cleric has to conserve all his spells just to be a healing dummy for the rest of the party then that ruins the fun for the cleric. Thumbs up on Channel Energy.
Raise Dead still costs a lot of money, and having a non-permanent penalty if also a good thing in my mind. I'd like to see the negative level not be curable for a week just so death has some kind of effect aside from draining gold from the parties coffers.
Mages Disjunction is a horrible spell under the 3.5 rules. Characters who die can recover with help, but character who lose all their magic items may as well retire. Jason did a good job here.
The changes to Save-or-Die I don't like. The danger that comes from save-or-die spells I think adds to the fun of D&D by creating a sense of urgency and danger when fighting spellcasters, but I also know that dying to one bad roll even if you've played your character well is not so fun. I'd like to see a compromise where it's save for damage and if you miss the save you save again the next round. Two failed saves and you die.
Overall is Pathfinder too soft? I would say yes, just a little bit.
Even if the game gets harder, however, more PC capabilities tend to make me happier.
I get extra skills? I am happy, doesn't matter that I now have to make regular skill-checks to avoid horrible death, in-fact, that's very cool.
Monsters get stronger, but I get more feats? Sure.
I don't see these as soft. I see them as furthering heroic play.
More PC abilities in a tougher game is an overall good thin, IMO.
Mages Disjunction got better. The only tweak I would make is to set the duration to days or hours per level, rather than 1 minute per level. The only other change I would make is to have no items in the area be immune - it should affect the caster's equipment just like everything else.
-Scott
Ok, first off, extra hit points are not really needed, I think. The increase in Toughness, the change in some class HD, and the extra hp of favored classes give enough extra hp to not need racial hitpoints or similar hp pulled out of nowhere...
Secondly, I find the channeling ability of the cleric both flavorful and an incredible way to make sure the cleric can use those other spells, finally, instead of having to wait six levels or more to be able to get some room to cast some spells without giving up healing ability.
Third, THANK YOU JASON for getting rid of DnD two crappiest rules ever: xp costs for spells and item creation and loosing a level when raised from the dead. I do think, however, that the negative level should be persistent OR not so easily negated. It could, for example, take two days to one week per character level before such a negative level could be restored. Or, it should take a level 7 to 9 spell, with ritual prerequisites (multiple casters, holy site, altar, and such...).
Fourth point: Mordenkainen's Disjunction or Mage's Disjunction in PF...
I never actually used that spell before (we mostly get to level 5 spells and then start new campaigns), but I think the old spell (Mordenkainen) is too harsh, and the new spell is too weak for a 9th level spell. You should make it a 7th or 8th level spell, or use it with instantaneous duration as dispel magic, meaning you can target one person, or item, or one item per person in the area. That makes it less "I have no more magical items, where can I find a dragon that can lend me its horde to rebuy my stuff' and more 'there goes my cool magic sword, luckily I still have my other stuff so I can teleport away'...
Fifth point: Save or Die spells - I have read the other threads on this and must say I understand both sides. I think massive damage is a killer to most things, so that's ok, but please keep the SoD effects in the necromancy line of spells, for flavor in the least...
Sixth point: Damage Reduction weakened. I am confused about this change... I like the idea of magic items overcoming mystical DR, such as silver or cold iron and increasing damage when being of the material and having the needed magical power. On the other hand, I don't think a +3/+4 weapon should be used to ignore DR/adamantine or DR/aligned, because both are very different from magical source, the first being normal, mortal, hardness, and the latter a protection based on morality and divinity... So I like it only 50 %...
That's my opinion, sorry for long post...
Another thing that one of my players feels is going soft on the PCs is allowing Rogues Sneak Attack everything, hey once in a while your character is not doing optimum damage big deal. there is like a 100 responce thread about making sneak attack a standard action because its so good i think part of creatures not being affected was balancing the damage output that Sneak attack can do
Make it a Rogue Talent to sneak attack undead and another for constructs
I actually forgot to answer this thread's initial question: Has PF gone soft on the PCs.
No, I don't think so. PF has given more hp, but NPC characters have the same benefits (except those without class levels, but undead will get more hp, so maybe other monsters will get similar benefits, only time will tell). No more suckyness with loosing levels or paying xp for spells is not going soft on the PCs, it's going zen on player's frustration. Sitting 15 minutes to de-level a character is a b**ch, pardon my language...
And the spells are still very lethal, just not SoD anymore. And mage's disjunction still is a party killer, just not financially so...
I feel PF has created a lot more survivability, both on low and high level, without making adventuring a cake walk.
|
I always thought D&D itself was "soft" on PCs.
In my personal games, I've removed ALL non-zombie type raise the dead spells of less than 9th level.
Extra hitpoints? HA! It took me 6 months to warm to starting at max hitpoints.
Channeling? Thank *God* It extends the adventuring day and lets clerics be something other than the talking medkit.
As for rogues sneak attacking everything? Well, what I'VE seen in the past is once the Rogue's sneak attack becomes worth a darn, DMs have started having adventures that seemed like nothing but Undead, Constructs, Oozes, and Plants. As long as I don't think too hard about how a rogue knows where to stab a viscous blob of gibbering chaos to be most effective, I find the new Sneak Attack a boon.
I really really REALLY don't like the +X can overcome DR/Y mechanic at all. I thought this was a huge improvement from 3.0 to 3.5. Under this new/old rule all you have to do is constantly improve the enhancement bonus of your primary weapon and you've got no problems.
Every spellcaster is going to be memorizing/learning/scribing scrolls of Greater Magic Weapon now.
In my opinion: this rule significantly lowers the challenge of certain encounters. Creatures with weird DR are supposed to be harder to kill.
Let's keep it this way.