|
In reading various online resources for newer DMs, I find I'm running across a consistent opinion that v3.5 gets really complicated at higher levels. For example, one poster at PenandPaperPortal mentioned, "As a DM, it brought back the simplicity that 3.5 lost (at higher levels in 3.5, monsters and characters have so many abilities and scores to track that combat bogs the game down to a crawl)."
Has anyone tested out higher-level play using the PF beta? As I mentioned in another thread, I'm enjoying the simplicity and balance of 4e, but I would really rather use Paizo's adventure paths, iconics, and the Golarion setting.
Just curious if anyone has an opinion or ideas.
|
Honestly I never really ran into that with 3.5 honestly. I know others talk about it, but I never did. But then I would spend time going over each encounter before the game and making notes. Decided then and there what they would like do ect. I knew the PC's well enough to know their strengths and weaknesses and likely their rough tactics.
So I consider what the mob would do when faced with the PC's and knowing what it knows. With a rough battle plan layed out for the encounter ahead of time, I just never had that problem.
But also to be fair I rarely ran much high level stuff or played in it. PC's for my taste tended to get to powerful and for me it lost much of the appeal of the game. 4-12 those are the fun levels. I am hoping Paizo expandeds that both ways with PFRPG.
|
The higher level play of Dungeons and Dragons normally does get more complex, that's part of the reward for growing so powerful as characters.
With proper management and players actually paying attention to what's going on in the game, most of the higher level play can speed along quite nicely. Fights are going to take longer, but they're going to feel a heck of a lot more epic at the same time.
That being said, the Pathfinder RPG is streamlining a lot of the more time consuming processes that happen a lot at higher levels, especially when it comes to shape changing and a few other similar things.
I'm not sure about high level play (I run a low-magic game, so high-level play is rarely a problem for me anyway), but one of the things I've seen between the Beta and the previews is that similar subsystems in the rules are getting consolidated -- for example, the monk's flurry of blows becoming an extension of the two-weapon fighting rules, or all the combat maneuvers operating under the same CMB/CMD model. That alone simplifies the rules a bit by eliminating some of the corner cases. Additionally, streamlining certain spells, limiting the number of magic item slots that can be used for buffs, and revising the way some high-level monsters should all help the game run more smoothly at higher levels.
My bet is that Pathfinder won't be drastically simpler than the 3.5 rules, but it will probably run a bit smoother because the rules have been streamlined and refocused a bit.
|
|
The problems I've seen as a high-level DM aren't fixed at all by Pathfinder. The math for NPCs and monsters at high level are just as bad as they ever were in 3.5, with maybe a few less skills to keep track of. Grapple's a bit easier to run, but other than monsters with improved grab, grapple was never a tactic that my PCs or NPCs ever used. I'm hoping the revamped poison and disease rules are impressive, though.
Now if they come up with a system for Epic levels (21-30, or even 21-40) that cuts through some of the math, that'll be an accomplishment. For right now, there's no overall simplifications of note in Pathfinder. For every good skill combination, there's a new set of class abilities to keep track of.
|
|
In reading various online resources for newer DMs, I find I'm running across a consistent opinion that v3.5 gets really complicated at higher levels.
SOme would say that is the stength of v3.5/pf. The complexitiy comes from the interaction of class/skill/feats/spells/phases of the moon... As characters get higher level the number of these things increases and naturally the combinations increases. If you dislike complexity (of interactions the system is always d20 + mod. i.e. simple) then I would suggest an earlier version of D&D or strangely enough the later version...
S.
I'd say that yes, some issues are resolved. Not all, though.
The best way to avoid that is to not play high levels.
I don't like 4e's way of dealing with this: High levels aren't more complicated because they're just like low levels. Where's the point in that? 3e's system offers many styles of play.
I for one like many options, and if that comes with some added complexity, then so be it.