Is there a summary of the goals and overall theme and approach to Pathfinder?

[joethelawyer]

What i mean is, i know the beta and alpha tests give every rule a look-over, so as to determine what to change and what to keep.

is there an overall approach as to what to change and what to leave the same? some consistent overall themes or goals paizo is aiming for other than some generic "lets make the game as good as it can be!" kind of statement? is there some sort of overarching criteria being applied?

something along the lines of "make it more of a tactical battlemat wargame" or "make wizards more powerful" or reduce combat time by half" or "make skill checks simpler" ?

basically, give me the 30 second elevator statement without the fluff.

thanks for the answers. i dont have the time frankly to read and compare the nuances of the changes and come up with an overall understanding of the goals.

joe

[James Jacobs]

joethelawyer wrote:

What i mean is, i know the beta and alpha tests give every rule a look-over, so as to determine what to change and what to keep.

is there an overall approach as to what to change and what to leave the same? some consistent overall themes or goals paizo is aiming for other than some generic "lets make the game as good as it can be!" kind of statement? is there some sort of overarching criteria being applied?

something along the lines of "make it more of a tactical battlemat wargame" or "make wizards more powerful" or reduce combat time by half" or "make skill checks simpler" ?

basically, give me the 30 second elevator statement without the fluff.

thanks for the answers. i dont have the time frankly to read and compare the nuances of the changes and come up with an overall understanding of the goals.

joe

I'm not sure if we have a public mission statement or something for the beta, but basically it's this: Make a game that lets us tell the stories we've been telling, but at the same time makes the game fun or more fun to play.

[joethelawyer]

James Jacobs wrote:

joethelawyer wrote:

What i mean is, i know the beta and alpha tests give every rule a look-over, so as to determine what to change and what to keep.

is there an overall approach as to what to change and what to leave the same? some consistent overall themes or goals paizo is aiming for other than some generic "lets make the game as good as it can be!" kind of statement? is there some sort of overarching criteria being applied?

something along the lines of "make it more of a tactical battlemat wargame" or "make wizards more powerful" or reduce combat time by half" or "make skill checks simpler" ?

basically, give me the 30 second elevator statement without the fluff.

thanks for the answers. i dont have the time frankly to read and compare the nuances of the changes and come up with an overall understanding of the goals.

joe

I'm not sure if we have a public mission statement or something for the beta, but basically it's this: Make a game that lets us tell the stories we've been telling, but at the same time makes the game fun or more fun to play.

thanks for the answer james. i was looking for something more concrete as to the direction.

a purely HYPOTHETICAL example would be thief abilities. "do you make the abilities traditionally used by thieves/rogues available to other classes with no cross-class penalty?" i could argue either position equally well and convincingly using the criteria "fun". at the end of the day, you guys make the decision. what do you use as a decision-making filter? what are your criteria for changing things? are there specific guidelines that you follow? or do you sit around the table and say "ok---thief abilities---cross-class penalty or not?" and take a vote?

see what i'm getting at? if you had a guideline or a design goal, one of 20 or 30, which said "all classes will be further differentiated from each other in this game than they were in 3.5, so as to make each class more unique than ever before", it wouldn't be up for a vote. the answer would be apparent. that would also answer the hypothetical question of whether certain feats would be shared across classes, or restricted to just fighters, for example.

are there any such guidelines or goals? are there specific objectives you are trying to achieve?

thx

joe

[Jarod Darkblade]

joethelawyer wrote:

a purely HYPOTHETICAL example would be thief abilities.

Objection!

Me and others of my profession resent to be called thieves. We feel the need to clarify that we are comprised of a myriad of professionals in many different lines of work - thief being only one of them: we count among ourself assassins, scouts, spies, duneon delvers, security experts, and agents of dozens of specialisations.

If you persist in your wrongful discrimination against our guilds, we are forced to take legal action.

[KaeYoss]

joethelawyer wrote:

thanks for the answer james. i was looking for something more concrete as to the direction.

I'd say it's quite difficult to put it in a short statement without being too general.

My attempt to state their goals, based on what I've seen so far:

Fix problematic rules, streamline and simplify when appropriate.

Give every race and class a place in the world, that means that they should be both interesting and effectie to play.

Maintain backwards compatibility as much as possible.

That's still quite general, but I fear that you cannot be to specific without going into pages of explanation.