I'm sorry but the more and more I look at PRPG the more and more I hate the system, all it is is 3.5 with a few houserules added on, barely anything is fixed, and all my big problems with 3.5 will never dissapear seeing how Paizo is in a backwards-compatibility mindset. I'm moving on from the bloated whale that is 3.5 and the failure (Not in a business sense but in a play sense IMO) that is PRPG. Peace, have fun with the system to all of you that play it.
I'll probably still stick around here for the 4E forums and take a look at the Pathfinder setting and convert it for use in 4E.
All I'd urge you to do is download the Free PDF of Beta when it comes out. If you still feel like it's not an improvement. Well, that's your right to game in whatever system you please.
All I'd urge you to do is download the Free PDF of Beta when it comes out. If you still feel like it's not an improvement. Well, that's your right to game in whatever system you please.
I plan on it, but the way things are looking its most likely not going to change anything.
|
I understand much of your frustration. Before Pathfinder was announced, my group and I came up with a litany of house rules to streamline the gameplay. With the announcement of Pathfinder, I hoped that many of the house rule issues would be addressed. They weren't.
Granted, not everyone likes my house rules.
In the end, I remain interested in Pathfinder, despite the likelihood that my house rules will be carrying forward. Why? Because of the improvements that I'm seeing.
Particularly - I really like the work that Paizo has done to upgrade the core classes. Granted, I haven't play-tested them against other classes. So, against a psion, psychic warrior, samurai, scout, spell thief, and so on, I can't say whether everyone is now on an even playing field or not.
Aside from that, I appreciate some tweaks that have occurred with spells.
But skills? Not condensed enough. Feats? I'm on the fence.
My advice - hang in there. If Pathfinder isn't for you, then it isn't. I'd at least hang on to see what Jason has done with the Beta.
Perhaps you'll remain discouraged.
or Perhaps you'll see a system you can work with.
I understand much of your frustration. Before Pathfinder was announced, my group and I came up with a litany of house rules to streamline the gameplay. With the announcement of Pathfinder, I hoped that many of the house rule issues would be addressed. They weren't.
Granted, not everyone likes my house rules.
In the end, I remain interested in Pathfinder, despite the likelihood that my house rules will be carrying forward. Why? Because of the improvements that I'm seeing.
Particularly - I really like the work that Paizo has done to upgrade the core classes. Granted, I haven't play-tested them against other classes. So, against a psion, psychic warrior, samurai, scout, spell thief, and so on, I can't say whether everyone is now on an even playing field or not.
Aside from that, I appreciate some tweaks that have occurred with spells.
But skills? Not condensed enough. Feats? I'm on the fence.
My advice - hang in there. If Pathfinder isn't for you, then it isn't. I'd at least hang on to see what Jason has done with the Beta.
Perhaps you'll remain discouraged.
or Perhaps you'll see a system you can work with.
Like I said, I'm sticking around for a little bit more. But for the most part I doubt I'll end up getting PRPG. I was especially dissiponted in the last release, especially how they didn't adress problems the Monk, Ranger, and Paladin had. I still don't like the skill system (Mainly due to classes still not getting enough points and I'm a fan of SAGA's skill system). But I do gotta admit, I love what they did with races (Except the Half Elf, man did that one get screwed in R. 2) and the Rogue is shows an excellent design I was hoping most others would follow.
I find it curious that we have posts like this, lamenting that Pathfinder is too much like 3.5, while we also have people who are bailing because
they deem it to be too different.
Isn't that the point of having a Beta Test...to tweak and provide feedback about what we like and what we don't like? Let's not take our toys and go home just yet. If we want PRPG to be what 4th edition should have been, then we need to roll up our sleeves and provide precise feedback. We need to give them something more helpful than "It's too similar" or "It's too different."
I do find it a bit disappointing how readily some would abandon such an admirable undertaking as PRPG.
Let him depart; his passport shall be made,
And crowns for convoy put into his purse:
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
I've posted advice and suggestions, just alot of it gets ignored.
** spoiler omitted **
Ah yes, but was it not also said...
** spoiler omitted **
Ah yes, but was it not also said...
** spoiler omitted **
Yes, I know him. Wasn't he friends with...
** spoiler omitted **
Yep. My high school neighbored a Catholic girl's school called Maria Regina. Needless to say, the cloistered girls were rather friendly and so certain people fiddled mischievously with that school's last name.
Sorry for the threadjack, Vik. I blame hormones in the tofu.
|
I was especially dissiponted in the last release, especially how they didn't adress problems the Monk, Ranger, and Paladin had. I still don't like the skill system (Mainly due to classes still not getting enough points and I'm a fan of SAGA's skill system). But I do gotta admit, I love what they did with races (Except the Half Elf, man did that one get screwed in R. 2) and the Rogue is shows an excellent design I was hoping most others would follow.
I cut and pasted the OP's line from his previous post. I'm asking for him to clarify on the problems he sees with the monk, ranger and paladin classes and skill system...if he feels like taking the time to do so since he's done it somewhere on the boards before and maybe it wasn't seen or heeded.
Thanks for the chance again to listen to your points concerning the above since I missed them the first time.
Kohl
|
You know what I really don't understand. Every day we get one of two types of posts on just about everything in PFRPG. The first is the "This is way too different from 3.5 and it sucks" post. The second is the "This is way to similar to 3.5 and it sucks" post. Those posts are then usually followed up by a "if they don't change this to/back to what I want then I am cancelling all my subscriptions and won't buy any more Paizo products."
If you just skim these boards you would get the erroneous idea that nothing Paizo could do would make even a majority of their players happy. I'm tired of the constant whining by folks that either wanted a reprint of 3.5 verbatim or a reprint of 4e verbatim, both with a Pathfinder logo on them.
I am beginning to see why WotC never did an open playtest. Too many folks involved have this sense that open playtest means they are entitled to get whatever they want, and if they don't then they were betrayed and lied to. PFRPG is 3.5 compatible no matter how much some folks who want it to be just like 3.5 argue it isn't. PFRPG has made significant improvements to the problems of 3.5 no matter how much those who want PFRPG to be 4e argue it hasn't. I mean how can this game be too radically different from, and too completely identical to 3.5 at the same time? Sheesh. I hope that the Paizo team has an easier time filtering through the pure complaints to actually get to the playtest feedback than I have. Every thread has at least one of each of these extremes. Why can't everyone see PFRPG for what it is. It is a 3.5 compatible (note, not 3.5 identical) game system that will also make changes to aspects of 3.5 that need to be improved (note, not changed to 4e). The end goal is to have a core book that will allow you to play the Pathfinder AP, but that is similar enough to 3.5 that a person using 3.5 books can do so with easy conversions. I think they are very much on track to achieve that goal.
To the OP.... I hope you are happy with whatever game you play. It sounds like 4e is much more in line with what you want. There is still a full year of playtesting after the Beta before PFRPG is finalized. You may find that if you continue to make suggestions that some of the things you want will get better in later releases. The only way to make that happen is continue to contribute in a constructive way and offer playtest feedback that demonstrates how your suggestions are better for the game.
** spoiler omitted **
Ah yes, but was it not also said...
** spoiler omitted **
LMAO! Well played, sir, well played.
I find it curious that we have posts like this, lamenting that Pathfinder is too much like 3.5, while we also have people who are bailing because
they deem it to be too different.Isn't that the point of having a Beta Test...
Having already replied in the other thread, I'd like to thank You for summing up my thoughts perfectly.
Each thought there was one cat too many.
So they fought and they fit.
And they scratched and they bit.
Until, except for their nails,
And the tips of their tails.
Instead of two cats, there weren't any!
Dear Liza, dear Liza
There's a hole in the bucket,
Dear Liza, there's a hole.
Then fix it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry
Then fix it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, fix it.
With what shall I fix it,
Dear Liza, dear Liza?
With what shall I fix it,
Dear Liza, with what?
With a straw, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry
With a straw, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, with a straw.
But the straw is too long,
Dear Liza, dear Liza
But the straw is too long,
Dear Liza, too long
Then cut it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry
Then cut it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, cut it.
With what shall I cut it,
Dear Liza, dear Liza?
With what shall I cut it,
Dear Liza, with what?
With an axe, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry
With an axe, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, an axe.
The axe is too dull,
Dear Liza, dear Liza
The axe is too dull,
Dear Liza, too dull
Then sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry
Then sharpen it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, sharpen it.
With what shall I sharpen it,
Dear Liza, dear Liza?
With what shall I sharpen it,
Dear Liza, with what?
With a stone, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry
With a stone, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, a stone.
The stone is too dry,
Dear Liza, dear Liza
The stone is too dry,
Dear Liza, too dry
Then wet it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry
Then wet it, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, wet it.
With what shall I wet it,
Dear Liza, dear Liza?
With what shall I wet it,
Dear Liza, with what?
With water, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry
With water, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, with water.
How shall I get it,
Dear Liza, dear Liza,
How shall I get it,
Dear Liza, how shall I?
In the bucket, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, dear Henry
In the bucket, dear Henry,
Dear Henry, in the bucket.
There's a hole in the bucket.
|
|
The only way to make that happen is continue to contribute in a constructive way and offer playtest feedback that demonstrates how your suggestions are better for the game.
Yup. Seriously, while some of the rules might look off, you gotta play to see if they work. For example, the CMB worked wonderfully..no need to constantly look up rules in a playtest of mine recently.
The same goes for 4e. You should playtest it to see if it suits.
To the OP.... I hope you are happy with whatever game you play. It sounds like 4e is much more in line with what you want. There is still a full year of playtesting after the Beta before PFRPG is finalized. You may find that if you continue to make suggestions that some of the things you want will get better in later releases. The only way to make that happen is continue to contribute in a constructive way and offer playtest feedback that demonstrates how your suggestions are better for the game.
I'm just going to say this one more time (Not trying to be rude) I'M STILL STICKING AROUND AND WILL STILL MAKE SOME COMMENTS AND OFFERING IDEAS BUT OR THE MOST PART I'M DONE WITH PRPG! AND TO SAY ONCE AGAIN I AM TAKING INTEREST IN THE GAME SETTING AND CONVERTING IT TO 4E SO PAIZO STILL GETS MY MONEYS.
*Clears throat* Caps lock, cruise control for cool. now, one question, where can I find these chats with Jason? I don't have school for the break and I usually do jack on Tuesdays.
Having already replied in the other thread, I'd like to thank You for summing up my thoughts perfectly.
Spoiler:-
There once were two cats of Kilkenny.
Each thought there was one cat too many.
So they fought and they fit.
And they scratched and they bit.
Until, except for their nails,
And the tips of their tails.
Instead of two cats, there weren't any!
You have no idea how bizarre it is to see Kilkenny get mentioned on the Paizo boards.
In an unrelated matter I've been converting all the monsters/foes in Whispering Cairn to the Alpha rules, it really doesn't take very long, though class level foes are a bit more work, obviously. So it really isn't a massive deal to convert fully to PFRPG. Just my two cents.
I'm sorry but the more and more I look at PRPG the more and more I hate the system, all it is is 3.5 with a few houserules added on, barely anything is fixed, and all my big problems with 3.5 will never dissapear seeing how Paizo is in a backwards-compatibility mindset.
The idea of PRPG is to give 3e gamers what they want - an improvement to a rulesytem they already own.
Anything more, and we can just toss all of those splat books and 3rd party sources many of us have shelled out good money for.
I feel your pain - I have my own ideas about what a 'perfect' RPG would look like, but that isn't the purpose behind Paizo's endeavor. They are trying to give us at least a few more years with a system we already own.
Personally, if I could create a system from scratch, I would have everyone level by race, and everything else would be built off of the Skill system.
I feel your pain - I have my own ideas about what a 'perfect' RPG would look like, but that isn't the purpose behind Paizo's endeavor. They are trying to give us at least a few more years with a system we already own.
Wisdom.
It certianly isn't my intent to rip on the OP for having different opinions, but everyone has their own personal views of what a dream-edition of D&D would look like. And I don't think that imposing those expectations on Pathfinder is fair.
Ideally, PRPG is going to be 3.5 with a thorough professional spitshine. Keeping that intent in mind is the only way we're going to reach any sort of concensus.
To the OP.... I hope you are happy with whatever game you play. It sounds like 4e is much more in line with what you want. There is still a full year of playtesting after the Beta before PFRPG is finalized. You may find that if you continue to make suggestions that some of the things you want will get better in later releases. The only way to make that happen is continue to contribute in a constructive way and offer playtest feedback that demonstrates how your suggestions are better for the game.
I'm just going to say this one more time (Not trying to be rude) I'M STILL STICKING AROUND AND WILL STILL MAKE SOME COMMENTS AND OFFERING IDEAS BUT OR THE MOST PART I'M DONE WITH PRPG! AND TO SAY ONCE AGAIN I AM TAKING INTEREST IN THE GAME SETTING AND CONVERTING IT TO 4E SO PAIZO STILL GETS MY MONEYS.
*Clears throat* Caps lock, cruise control for cool. now, one question, where can I find these chats with Jason? I don't have school for the break and I usually do jack on Tuesdays.
skim offtopic for paizo chatroom Vic.
(chat.dmtools.org)
Director of Games
|
Hey there all,
While I am not going to spoil the Beta changes just yet, there were modifications made to a good number of rules, almost all of which came from these messageboards. I am sorry if you do not feel like you were being listened to, but I want to point out that "not posting a response" is not the same as "not listening". I read a lot of the boards to make the Beta happen. That said, I feel pretty confident in saying that we're not done tinkering yet. I did not get to make all the changes I wanted to in the Beta, but I am going to have plenty of time to get it right in the final. I hope that you will stick around for the process. If not, thanks for your participation up to this point.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
Hey there all,
While I am not going to spoil the Beta changes just yet, there were modifications made to a good number of rules, almost all of which came from these messageboards. I am sorry if you do not feel like you were being listened to, but I want to point out that "not posting a response" is not the same as "not listening". I read a lot of the boards to make the Beta happen. That said, I feel pretty confident in saying that we're not done tinkering yet. I did not get to make all the changes I wanted to in the Beta, but I am going to have plenty of time to get it right in the final. I hope that you will stick around for the process. If not, thanks for your participation up to this point.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Thanks for stopping by and listening to us! I'm wondering how Paizo plans to incorporate any suggestions that pop up between the Beta and the Real Deal, August '09?
/Thread-jack ON/
You have no idea how bizarre it is to see Kilkenny get mentioned on the Paizo boards. (...)
Ah! I did not know that "Kilkenny" is a place. I have good Irish Kilkenny Cheddar cheese in my fridge, but it never crossed my mind that it was actually a location!
Damn good cheese by the way...
Watch out for the ogres.
Cheers,
Bocklin
/Thread-jack OFF/
I mean how can this game be too radically different from, and too completely identical to 3.5 at the same time?
Because a game system is not just one piece. There are several different pieces and which pieces individuals view as more important or less determines their viewpoint. If someone, like me, views a change to the magic system as something I am not going to tolerate, then the system is too different from 3.5 from my viewpoint. If someone else views keeping, I don't know, skill points as being too similar they are right from their viewpoint. Changes are going to be made, will they be too big or too many or not enough? That is a totally subjective viewpoint in most cases and so you can get too completely different takes on it.
|
|
Hey there all,
While I am not going to spoil the Beta changes just yet, there were modifications made to a good number of rules, almost all of which came from these messageboards. I am sorry if you do not feel like you were being listened to, but I want to point out that "not posting a response" is not the same as "not listening". I read a lot of the boards to make the Beta happen. That said, I feel pretty confident in saying that we're not done tinkering yet. I did not get to make all the changes I wanted to in the Beta, but I am going to have plenty of time to get it right in the final. I hope that you will stick around for the process. If not, thanks for your participation up to this point.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Eh, you can't keep 'em all happy all of the time. I, for one, am quite pleased with where pathfinder is going, especially after getting a good long look at the travesty that is 4th ed.
Eh, you can't keep 'em all happy all of the time. I, for one, am quite pleased with where pathfinder is going, especially after getting a good long look at the travesty that is 4th ed.
QFT right there
|
|
QFT right there
Eh, you can't keep 'em all happy all of the time. I, for one, am quite pleased with where pathfinder is going, especially after getting a good long look at the travesty that is 4th ed.
Seconded with the addition that our second night of playtesting is tonight and everyone is thrilled!
Hey there all,
While I am not going to spoil the Beta changes just yet, there were modifications made to a good number of rules, almost all of which came from these messageboards. I am sorry if you do not feel like you were being listened to, but I want to point out that "not posting a response" is not the same as "not listening". I read a lot of the boards to make the Beta happen. That said, I feel pretty confident in saying that we're not done tinkering yet. I did not get to make all the changes I wanted to in the Beta, but I am going to have plenty of time to get it right in the final. I hope that you will stick around for the process. If not, thanks for your participation up to this point.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Is Vanacian casting dead? Please tell me its dead and all will be col and I'll go out and buy Pathfinder with a bow on.
|
Is Vanacian casting dead? Please tell me its dead and all will be col and I'll go out and buy Pathfinder with a bow on.
Vik, 4e seems more your cup of tea anyway (and you have said so, IIRC). Yet you still seem keen on Pathfinder. While I appreciate it isn't entirely an either/or, out of curiosity, what is it you like about PF or you don't like about 4e that keeps you engaged with PF (albeit tenuously)?
Viktor,
The loss of Vancian casting would signal that Pathfinder has failed in its effort to maintain both backward capability and the spirit of D&D. Sounds like 4E, which has revamped the casting system, is more aligned with your interests.
Viktor, have you examined the spell points or the recharge magic or the incantation alternate rules for 3.5? They might be worth examining.
The loss of Vancian casting would signal that Pathfinder has failed in its effort to maintain both backward capability and the spirit of D&D.
The first it had never archieved as I see it, and the second I argue is not the case. Making divine casters more like sorcerers and sorcerers more like psions won't hurt the spirit of D&D at all.
When I created my spellpoint system (which is very similar to psionics/unearthed arcana) I did it with the clear goal in mind to keep spellbooks, preparation, and stuff. The only difference is that you don't prepare spells for the day, but spells known for the day, and then convert slots to points. Still keeps all the differences between wizards, clerics, and bards.|
Director of Games
|
Is Vanacian casting dead? Please tell me its dead and all will be col and I'll go out and buy Pathfinder with a bow on.Hey there all,
While I am not going to spoil the Beta changes just yet, there were modifications made to a good number of rules, almost all of which came from these messageboards. I am sorry if you do not feel like you were being listened to, but I want to point out that "not posting a response" is not the same as "not listening". I read a lot of the boards to make the Beta happen. That said, I feel pretty confident in saying that we're not done tinkering yet. I did not get to make all the changes I wanted to in the Beta, but I am going to have plenty of time to get it right in the final. I hope that you will stick around for the process. If not, thanks for your participation up to this point.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Viktor,
Vancian magic is here to stay. If that means that the Pathfinder RPG is not for you, then I thank you for your contributions and hope you'll check back with us in the future.
Unfortunately (and I knew this going in), there is no way to make everyone happy with the new system.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
Is Vanacian casting dead? Please tell me its dead and all will be col and I'll go out and buy Pathfinder with a bow on.Hey there all,
While I am not going to spoil the Beta changes just yet, there were modifications made to a good number of rules, almost all of which came from these messageboards. I am sorry if you do not feel like you were being listened to, but I want to point out that "not posting a response" is not the same as "not listening". I read a lot of the boards to make the Beta happen. That said, I feel pretty confident in saying that we're not done tinkering yet. I did not get to make all the changes I wanted to in the Beta, but I am going to have plenty of time to get it right in the final. I hope that you will stick around for the process. If not, thanks for your participation up to this point.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
First off what is wrong with vancian casting?
I hate vancian casting - always have, and always will. I loved it in Jack Vance's books though (where it was done right, unlike the way it is represented in D&D novels).
Anyhow, I have always used alternate methods, usually houseruled, but most recently from UA.
Despite that, I am still a supporter of Pathfinder, because I can STILL keep the changes I made to MY campaign intact. There is no reason why you can't still use the alternate casting methods offered in other sources with Pathfinder.
I had high hopes for 4e, but until it's complete (and currenly I feel its far from) I find it unuseable. You see, I use a lot of Bards and Monks IMG, along with Gnomes, half-Orcs, etc, etc... along with all the 'mental' spells taken away from Wizards so Psions would have a more defined role, so that now I feel there is a major hole in the game (sseveral, actually).
4e was a let down, and while PRPG isn't perfect, it allows me to keep chugging along with what I am used to, and with far more polish. Maybe in a few years I'll look at 4e again, when they finish it.
Viktor, have you examined the spell points or the recharge magic or the incantation alternate rules for 3.5? They might be worth examining.
Yup, and its the system I prefer.
Is Vanacian casting dead? Please tell me its dead and all will be col and I'll go out and buy Pathfinder with a bow on.Vik, 4e seems more your cup of tea anyway (and you have said so, IIRC). Yet you still seem keen on Pathfinder. While I appreciate it isn't entirely an either/or, out of curiosity, what is it you like about PF or you don't like about 4e that keeps you engaged with PF (albeit tenuously)?
The Rogue, races, and the fact that despite all the stuff I don't like being in it, it still looks like it might be something I may really enjoy. That and the fact that it allows me to use all the splats I got without worrying about the brokeness of core (Though Core is still way way WAY broken). Honestly there isn't much about 4E I don't like, if I had to say one thing it would be the lack of Half Orcs, though I do love the Eladrin, Dragonbron, and Tieflings. All so, they could have done a better job putting the book togther (Like ya know putting the damn leveling table in the CLass section).
Yup, and its the system I prefer.
So what's stopping you from using them in the Pathfinder RPG?
Yup, and its the system I prefer.So what's stopping you from using them in the Pathfinder RPG?
While Vanacian catsing is one of my main problems theres still many more (Spell casting is still far to over powered, fighter, Monk, Ranger, Paladin still underpowered).
EDIT:
Yeah, that sounded more rude than I wanted it to.
Viktor, have you examined the spell points or the recharge magic or the incantation alternate rules for 3.5? They might be worth examining.
Yup, and its the system I prefer.
So what's stopping you from using them in the Pathfinder RPG?
FWIW, I've never cared for Vancian casting and use UA's Recharge Magic in my game. It's not a perfect system but it's basically backwards compatible with existing content. I just give NPCs an extra spell memorized for every duplicate casting they have in their stat block.
With that said, I'd never recommend for it to be included as the primary magic system for the core rulebooks. Too many people (i.e. the majority) prefer Vancian and being such an extensive alternate rule, it rightly belongs in a separate book. I just wish the Spell Compendium had a line for each spell noting if a spell had a generic or specific recharge time... A parenthetical entry after the casting time wouldn't have taken any extra space.
I am beginning to see why WotC never did an open playtest. Too many folks involved have this sense that open playtest means they are entitled to get whatever they want,
Somewhere I was listening to a podcast about video game beta testing recently where one speaker noted that today's Beta tester is not there to test the game as they were invited to, but to make a purchasing decision. As a result companies have had to adapt and no longer beta test anything but essentially finished product minus a few last minute tweaks.
The Beta test for the video game industry has essentially been changed from a testing tool to a marketing tool, and real testing has had to return to the in house only days.