i have to say when i first dl this and read boards i was looking foward to using pathfriend to replace my 3.5 games. but i must say the more i read the less i started to like it. I just got to spells and looked over the wizard specialist power. i dont see the need to give the caster classes all these spell like powers like they are some sort of monsters. wizards dont need any help they are powerful as is, now getting more HP is great. I understand that some dont like the 15 min day, but to be honest, it allows DM to keep control of how the party is doing in mission. I got a group that we ended with 2 rooms left they are trying to rest so they can be at FULL stregth, but the mission was design for them to me weaken by the encounters that lead up to the last battle and so i will make sure they cant rest.
Alot of pathfinder is great, i love the reworked classes(other than wizard and soc) and the skills are great as well but i am going to get my pro from fire up before i say this but it has the feel of 4eish to me. i guess i will see how beta goes but it looking like i will be just using parts of pathfinder and stick with 3.5, maybe the final will surprise me but i think i am old of the old school camp that still likes 2e too much heh. those were the days when DMs had a book of house rules :)
I suspect that plenty of folks here are going to keep the bits from 3.5 that they like and the bits of Pathfinder that they like and make their own mixture of rules. So you're not alone. :-)
All I can say is that is still a work in progress. Have you play tested any of it?
If so the design team wants specifics scenarios where the rules did or did not work.
As has been stated by many here the final version comes over a year from now.
If you just want to sit on the sidelines and throw tomatoes at the effort there really was no reason to start this thread.
Crow81 wrote:
All I can say is that is still a work in progress. Have you play tested any of it?
If so the design team wants specifics scenarios where the rules did or did not work.
As has been stated by many here the final version comes over a year from now.
If you just want to sit on the sidelines and throw tomatoes at the effort there really was no reason to start this thread.
Let's say we have a jalopy that has severe rust problems. Someone puts a coat of paint on it. Do you need to take a test drive to say that the problem hasn't been fixed?
But we may not even agree on what the problems are. Maybe I think things are problems that you think are ok.
Here are just a couple. Terrain is meaningless after 9th level. Everyone is flying all the time. A 100' wide bottomless pit isn't even a speed bump. Forty miles of jungle between you and Bumfoozle's manor might as well not even be there.
There are tons more. What have you seen in this effort that is going to solve this? Maybe you think that after ten or so levels go by, adventurers shouldn't have to sweat the small stuff anymore. That is a valid viewpoint, but it isn't everyone's. D&D Gandalf wouldn't have bothered with anything, his Fellowship strike team would have teleported in, dropped that one ring like a bad habit, and ported out. Instead of going into the dwarven city they would have flown over the mountains.
Look, maybe my problems aren't anything you can relate to. And these kinds of arguments have been done over and over.
And as to why I am here? I don't really know. I still read the paizo boards every few days, but I don't think what I see here is going to be of much use to me. I used to scan the WOTC boards, but aside from 4e, that site is like getting teeth pulled to visit.
I'll put it another way. Exactly what is Pathfinder supposed to accomplish? And how is it doing it? Arcane Bond is my pet peeve of the things I've seen so far. I understand how it helps wizards, but what problem in 3e did it fix? Rage points are interesting, and will probably be handy now and then, but you could give unlimited rage points, and it won't change the reasons casters dominate high level play. Heck stick another 4 points of damage or so on fighter supremacy, or whatever it is called. Do you really think that is going to change much?
It is a way to keep a 3e compatible system in print, so you can have a dead tree book to look at, but it doesn't seem like it is fixing many problems to me.
Well, let's start with the obvious, sunbeam.
What problems need solved, as you view things?
If you have already decided that you prefer 4e, then the game probably isn't for you.
Seriously, people who make analogies that refer to 3.5 as a broken, rusted out car are probably already beyond our ability to impress.
Lathiira wrote: Well, let's start with the obvious, sunbeam.
What problems need solved, as you view things?
I put the following in another thread.
1) Caster/non caster balance. Pathfinder is making it worse. I think much worse.
2) Prep time. Doesn't help. Changing the system is going to make it worse, a lot at first, and probably will be an ongoing load as you always have to make changes to any current 3e stuff to make it go with Pathfinder.
3) High level play is just totally broken. Some people are going to say it isn't, they always do. But a lot of people have reported the same problem. Maybe we aren't as smart as you are, but I know this is the case. Pathfinder doesn't help.
4) The bookkeeping required while running 3e, and Pathfinder doesn't help.
5) How long combats take. I know someone out there is a super-genius, and I am an idiot, but it is hard to run even a simple combat without it taking at least 30 minutes. Complicated ones are at least two hours. At least. Pathfinder doesn't help.
This is a partial list. Everyone here I wager is familiar with the arguments. I'm sure I could think of a lot more and write a page or two of stuff, but like I said it has been discussed before, in many places.
Erik Mona wrote: If you have already decided that you prefer 4e, then the game probably isn't for you.
Seriously, people who make analogies that refer to 3.5 as a broken, rusted out car are probably already beyond our ability to impress.
I don't like 4e, and I won't be playing it. The more I look at it, the less I like it. And that is a long conversation in itself.
I've seen your postings here and there on the internet and usually I like them. You go to a lot of forums on the internet, so I am positive you are familiar with all the arguments I'm making.
You are right though, I doubt I will be using the Pathfinder system. I've liked the Pathfinder adventures I've seen so far, although they are a bit too... gross for my tastes sometimes. The inbred Ogres and man-eating goblins for a couple of things.
But there are a lot of things I don't like about 3e after 8 years or so, frankly I'm just tired of the system and need to find another.
This isn't a case of busting anyone's chops, but well it is time for me to move on. I'd gladly play a 3e or Pathfinder game, but I wouldn't run one. And there are other systems I'd rather try, but most people seem to want to play d&d.
Actually Sunbeam I think a lot of your problems with the system have more to do with "High Fantasy" then it does with the system. Your points on the system are valad, but a lot of it comes with the territory of high fantasy games. Your right the fellowship would not be telporting anywhere at 10th level, but in D&D land they do. I never played D&D till 3rd, and had a lot of the same complaints as you have when I started, but found that if you accept that this Gary and Daves version of fantasy (and for the record I don't think 4th is) then you find much more enjoyable. Think of it this way. The fellowship is facing an army of Orcs lead by ten Beholders, and they are held up in helmsdeep with its high walls and towering keep. Beholders just fly over and beam the gate open. In those terms the magic user has to cast a lot of reality bending stuff, while the fighter has to deal with the orcs. High fantasy. Not everyones taste.
One recomendation is to look carefully when buying sup. 3.5 books, assuming you're still going to buy anyting. I have found that many of the Atlas gams d20 books worked for me when I wanted very low fantasy game. Some would complain that the classes offered were not good becasue they had levels nothing were they are not given anything, but lets be honest in real life, or "Low Fantasy" not much happens to you anyways (I mean ablity wise). That not a bad thing but BTW. Also I've been play an off and on Conan game and have found it very enjoyable as a low fantasy setting, even though it has a lot of high fantasy stuff. Maybe too gritty for you but I would say that at lest most of your concerns are addressed in it.
P.S. still haven't played 4th, but getting info form some folks who have. Most telling moment, at my Flags my conan game was taking a break and a 4th ed. game was going on in another room. I over heard an older player, maybe in his 50's complaing about some magic rule. I said to him (I knew the guy) "you've complained about that since the red box". Some kid asked both of us what we were talking about. He told him that we ment 1st edtion D&D. The kind said, and I S*** you not.
"Oh yeah, 1st edition D&D that was the low magic/fantasy days right?"
Kids today.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Actually, the Wizard is arguably less powerful than before. The school abilities only come into play if you keep advancing as a Wizard, so if you go for some PrC, you lose the higher level ones.
Same goes for the Sorcerer and Cleric. It´s only that the Wizard and Cleric got mostly nerfed, while the Sorcerer got buffed to make it desirable for 20 levels, instead of opting out as soon as possible for the nearest PrC with full caster progression.
sunbeam wrote: [...]I'll put it another way. Exactly what is Pathfinder supposed to accomplish? And how is it doing it? Arcane Bond is my pet peeve of the things I've seen so far. I understand how it helps wizards, but what problem in 3e... Noone in our group has ever had a familiar. They don't like babysitting a pet. Arcane Bond (of an item) gives them another option.
And the wizard with his magic staff (or ring, or amulet) is a fairly iconic image. It feels right to me.
Lathiira wrote: Well, let's start with the obvious, sunbeam.
What problems need solved, as you view things?
I put the following in another thread.
1) Caster/non caster balance. Pathfinder is making it worse. I think much worse.
I have to agree giving caster classes MORE spell like powers what does that help to fix the gap?
Lathiira wrote:
2) Prep time. Doesn't help. Changing the system is going to make it worse, a lot at first, and probably will be an ongoing load as you always have to make changes to any current 3e stuff to make it go with Pathfinder.
yep, more things for me to track, "didnt u use that already today, no resting 8 hours does mean all your daily powers reset or does it?"
Lathiira wrote:
3) High level play is just totally broken. Some people are going to say it isn't, they always do. But a lot of people have reported the same problem. Maybe we aren't as smart as you are, but I know this is the case. Pathfinder doesn't help.
This is were we part ways, i dont think its that bad, yes it IS if you add in EVERY book out there, but if you limit your books, your spells, your items through your game, when they reach high lvl while they can do some impressive things you know EXACTLY what they can do and can easliy plan against it. i never had any problems with my high lvl games, but i been told i am a controling evil DM so maybe that is way to go :)
Lathiira wrote:
4) The bookkeeping required while running 3e, and Pathfinder doesn't help.
Again i agree but i dont mind too much about that.
Lathiira wrote:
5) How long combats take. I know someone out there is a super-genius, and I am an idiot, but it is hard to run even a simple combat without it taking at least 30 minutes. Complicated ones are at least two hours. At least. Pathfinder doesn't help.
A few simple changes could speed up play, using avg of dice for spell dmgs, have players roll as they wait their turn, and have everyone know their action when their turn is called up. but that takes getting used to your powers and i find that as the PCs grow they are not in a level long enough to master new spells, feats, and tactics, i will be slowing down my PCs at 13th to use slowest progression table to allow them to master each level completely before going on to next and adding more power. My 2e f/m of 15/18th lvl i played for 10 years to get that and i know her like i know myself, i know every spell combo, every way to use each of her powers, that is what is lacking in 3.x before you master all these new powers u advance again, and pathfinder gives them EVEN more to learn.
Lathiira wrote:
This is a partial list. Everyone here I wager is familiar with the arguments. I'm sure I could think of a lot more and write a page or two of stuff, but like I said it has been discussed before, in many places.
I think you and i had the same idea that pathfinder was a FIX for 3.5, and it is done a great job for the most part, but some of the changes dont FIX anything, they just seem to been thrown in cause some whining on the boards here about wizards shooting crossbows when running out of spells. i dont want my PCs to have unlimited use powers, at some point i want them to turn back and rest. overall PG UPS the power lvl of PCs not fixes them and that is what disappoints me about it.
I'm not sure that some of the listed problems are necessarily that of 3.5E or Pathfinder or whichever version you use.
Instead, it is more of what you want to get out of the game and how you want to run things. The books are a guide; that is, you don't have to use every single spell, power, and what not from them. Don't like wizards flying or teleporting? Remove the spells from the game or make them harder to come by. The same goes for magic items or whatever else is perceived as a problems. Pathfinder (and the original 3.5 books) give you a whole package to choose from, but you have to decide what you want and what is good for your game, and leaves the door open for others to do the same.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
knightnday wrote: The books are a guide; that is, you don't have to use every single spell, power, and what not from them. Don't like wizards flying or teleporting? Remove the spells from the game or make them harder to come by. The same goes for magic items or whatever else is perceived as a problems. This is okay for a homebrew campaign, but makes all of the published adventures, especially the APs, really hard to run.
I cut Fly and all higher movement spells for RotRL. It's doable but a lot of work, and I think I was lucky that the plot didn't rely on them the way AoW's plot does. As it was, I had to invent fixed-site teleportation circles in order to make sense of the bad guys' movements, and the boss fights in SotS were much easier than expected because the bosses relied so heavily on combat teleport and there was (as far as I could discover) no substitute available.
I loathe item profusion but I've never tried cutting that, because I think it would make every single AP unplayable without massive revision of all encounters past 6th level. The relationship between spell save DCs and PC saving throws is such that without backing items or buff spells, high level play is dominated by save-or-die. This is a fundamental feature of the mechanics, and hard to fix by band-aid changes.
Mary
Have you tried E6, the game within the game?
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=206323
Basically, you set up third edition or PfRPG such that characters can only get to 6th level. Every 5000 XP after that, they get a feat. (Eventually, they'll top out at about a CR10 equivalent, according to play-testing.) So: no raise dead, no teleports, no spamming fly, no buff monster PCs, no stone-skin, and limited magic item creation. There's also E8, for those who like a bit more PrC advancement.
And, since PfRPG makes low-level game much better, E6 goes even BETTER with this rule set!
roguerouge wrote: Have you tried E6, the game within the game?
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=206323
Basically, you set up third edition or PfRPG such that characters can only get to 6th level. Every 5000 XP after that, they get a feat. (Eventually, they'll top out at about a CR10 equivalent, according to play-testing.) So: no raise dead, no teleports, no spamming fly, no buff monster PCs, no stone-skin, and limited magic item creation. There's also E8, for those who like a bit more PrC advancement.
And, since PfRPG makes low-level game much better, E6 goes even BETTER with this rule set!
sounds horrible but thats just me :) i like my 13th+ teleporting flying save or die games, but looks like i am one of the few.
Recent threads in General Discussion
|
