One thing I would like to see is the conversion of the Arcane Armor Check penalty to a Concentration check DC.
Yeah. Spells need to be things that you roll for, like attacks or skills, and wearing prohibited armor should provide penalties to that roll. So you can throw your fireballs while wearing chainmail, but the fireballs you're throwing aren't as good as they would be if you weren't. HARP did this well.
I would also like to see some kind of non-class benefit for levels 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18. ... I think some racial traits would be good for these "dead" levels.
This. A thousand times this. I've been experimenting with a system where each character is a Gestalt between their "racial class" and their "occupational class"; on the whole, I would say that a character's race should be as influential toward the character's abilities and their development as their class.
4E promised this, and I think it did better with it than 3.X and Pathfinder did, but it's still insufficient. Of course, the alternate Favored Class benefits in Advanced Player's Guide were really a vast improvement.
* REDUCTION of core classes, and the re-introduction of the SUB-CLASS for core class variations.
I would actually prefer to go in the other direction, the elimination of prestige classes combined with an expansion of the base classes and a more robust multiclassing system. I would possibly agree with the reintroduction of the subclass system as a means of limiting multiclass combinations, though.
So, now that I've typed that up, I wouldn't mind if the far-flung future PFRPG2e used that rule for iterative attacks. It's pretty sweet.
I like the idea of replacing damage rolls with an amount of damage based on the margin of success on attack rolls, with additional attacks per round providing penalties to-hit. I like the idea of -2 to all attacks per extra attack and -2 cumulative to each attack after the first.
|
... not to obsolete the First Edition rules but to clear up all of the ambiguities, contradictions, and course changes that are made in the maturation of First Edition. In other words 2E books would mainly serve as a cleanup of First Ediiton.
+1. Basically, look at Hero Games and its system, SJG GURPS, and Chaosium's Call of Cthulhu and their numerous editions which are basically evolutionary changes to their systems, not a total rewrite.
|
+1. Basically, look at Hero Games and its system, SJG GURPS, and Chaosium's Call of Cthulhu and their numerous editions which are basically evolutionary changes to their systems, not a total rewrite.
I'm unfamiliar with GURPS or Hero Games. I do know Call of Cthulhu. But there's one problem with that tactic...if there's not really substantial enough change to make it worth buying the new edition for many gamers, it's not really worth putting out. Call of Cthulhu could probably actually benefit from more substantial rule changes between it's editions, at least on a financial level. (Purely based on the system, I think BRP is pretty damned good, I much prefer it to 3.X/d20/PFRPG) I own the hardcover for 5th edition, the PDF of 6th edition, and frankly I'll be damned if I could tell you what the differences are other than layout, some art, etc.
|
|
+1. Basically, look at Hero Games and its system, SJG GURPS, and Chaosium's Call of Cthulhu and their numerous editions which are basically evolutionary changes to their systems, not a total rewrite.I'm unfamiliar with GURPS or Hero Games. I do know Call of Cthulhu. But there's one problem with that tactic...if there's not really substantial enough change to make it worth buying the new edition for many gamers, it's not really worth putting out.
Exactly. I can continue to run my CoC game with 2nd edition, tell newbies joining in to purchase whatever's the latest edition, and not have to worry about new rules to agonize over.
Call of Cthulhu could probably actually benefit from more substantial rule changes between it's editions, at least on a financial level.
Apparently Chaosium disagrees. They must be making profit in a different way. Maybe all the supplements?
(Purely based on the system, I think BRP is pretty damned good, I much prefer it to 3.X/d20/PFRPG) I own the hardcover for 5th edition, the PDF of 6th edition, and frankly I'll be damned if I could tell you what the differences are other than layout, some art, etc.
Ditto. And the latter's a strength, IMO. (See above.)
|
|
I haven't actually ever played CoC prior to 5th edition, but I browsed through (IIRC) 4th or so. Still, I've looked at some pretty old supplements, and the biggest change that I have noticed to the system is that somewhere along the line, they decided that all skills (Cthulhu Mythos excepted) should have a 1% minimum chance of success. I'd really like to see a 1st edition rulebook, just to compare.
Oh yeah, and they stepped away from Cthulhu devouring 1d6 investigators per round, and just gave him a few attacks that are virtually assured of killing an investigator instead. So I guess that's a change too...sorta.
There should be no "2nd edition" for a while, but maybe a
"REVISED EDITION" might be in order where they include nothing that makes the present obsolete, but puts in some of the options they have placed elsewhere like traits, archetypes,etc.
I still have my share of things about 3.5/path I am not wild about: Vancian magic can be very annoying. Mostly I think there are too many attacks of opportunity, and too many feats whose sole purpose is to prevent attacks of opportunity--this somewhat incestuous method of creating a reason to create a feat was always annoying.....and I still think the number of prerequisites for whirlwind attack is riduculous.
BUT having said that, I would want all the vancian magic, annoying Attacks of opportunity and feats ALL included in a Revised EDITION.
I got into Pathfinder because I loved the feel and flavor of 3.5, knew it backwards and forwards, and so did everyone I knew. That is why 4e is starting to languish, while Pathfinder is slowly expanding, even though 4e had all the corporate help and (more importantly) all the D&D setting we loved.
My one suggestion--turn the Archetype options into "talents" that are restricted to specific classes. So anyone with "original" pathfinder's characters would be fine since those abilities would also be talents, but give those who buy a revised edition customizable options right in the core class.
To save money on the cover price I would also recommend the "revised core" leave out the GM stuff, and put it in a seperate book with the GameMastery guide stuff.
...to not come out for 6 to 8 years.
And I'd prefer that to be not for another 10 to 12.
|
|
Apparently Chaosium disagrees. They must be making profit in a different way. Maybe all the supplements?Maybe. Although those barely flow either. Pulp Cthulhu has been in the pipeline for the better part of a decade now. It's mostly monographs now, and re-issues of older works.
Could be, then, their overhead is that low that even zero-growth in new gamers is profitable. I work in the auto industry and one of the reasons the Crown Vic/Grand Marquis/Town Car plied the roads so long was that Ford pay off their R&D so long ago that every car sold was pure profit.
Not every company needs to be Wizard, SJG, or even White Wolf and change their rule system periodically to even break even, never mind a profit. (When's the last time Monopoly changed its rules?)
....reducing everything. Only 4-6 classes, no prestige classes and radically simplify the whole blown up rule system. Maximum 100-150 pages with a lot of graphic elements. This encourages new players to get in. (and those who have played D&D 20y ago and would rather eat nails than play or even read a 550p core rulebook with text printed in ant-size fonts)
In short: PF 2nd edition should go in direction D&D1/2 or BCMI with a little tuning up and adapting to modern times in text selection and artwork.
TSR and WOTC both made "Basic" versions of their games that fit your description, and it's a great idea. It's cheap, because you don't have to write new material for it, except perhaps some pre-made characters or adventures to get players started.
I agree that Pathfinder shouldn't have a 2e for at least a couple more years. Any less than 4 years between editions is bad, IMO. Though when that day comes, some things I'd like to see are:
Fix the skills. This is probably my biggest complaint about Pathfinder. They consolidated some skills, for example Move Silently + Hide became Stealth, Balance + Jump + Tumble became Acrobatics and Spot + Search + Listen became Perception, but then they left many other skills as they were, which created a tremendous imbalance in the usefulness and broadness of the skills. Do we really need geography, history, local and nobility as separate skills? IMO, Knowledge (History) should cover all of those things. Knowledge (Arcana) and (Planes) should likewise be combined. Do we really need a Fly skill? I never missed it in 3.5, and it's just a skill sink for spellcasters now, the same way Concentration was in 3.5.
I'd also like to see every class get at least 4 + Int mod skills per level. Skills are a major part of the game, and it sucks being a class that only gets to improve 2 of them per level.
I'd also like to see each class get a set number of hit points per level. I HATE rolling hit points, always have. I don't care how much of a sacred cow it is. At least make it an official option, like point buy is.
Iterative Attacks. Hate them. They're largely responsible for slowing down play at high levels. Also, monsters that have dozens of attacks (i.e. 2 claws, 2 wings, a bite and a tail slap!) also need to be reigned in. I propose that characters get an extra +1[W] die damage to their attack at each +5 BAB beyond the first, instead of an extra attack. As for the monsters, things like wing attacks need to go (seriously, something attacks me with its wings?) and rake and things like that are also big problems. I'd prefer each character/creature get one or two attacks on its turn, no more.
Can we get rid of Damage Reduction, please? It unfairly penalizes fighters. There's plenty of better ways of representing a monster's special weakness. Besides, DR was way overused. Sure, werewolves should be vulnerable to silver, and I can see needing a magic weapon to hurt a ghost, but needing a magic + bludgeoning weapon to hurt a lich? Why? Many of the Monsters seem to have DR for no good reason at all.
Characters should be limited to using one summon monster/nature's ally spell at a time, and no such spell should summon more than one creature at a time.
All "save or suck" spells/effects should offer a saving throw each round to shrug it off, like hold person. Nothing is worse than having to sit out an entire battle because your character failed one saving throw against nausea.
Use Character level, not class level, for caster level. This would solve most of the problems with multiclassing as a spellcaster. A character with one level in wizard may have just as good magic missiles as the 20th level wizard, but he still has only a couple magic missiles a day, while the 20th level wizard has many, many spells, of all levels. It doesn't break anything. What does break things is when the 19 ftr/1 wiz won't even bother using an attack spell because at that point its damage totally sucks and he can't beat anythings SR. On the same note, players should use their own ability scores and level when using any magic item, not just staffs.
Fix the Crafting Rules. Please.
If there's any way Paizo could bribe WotC into letting them have the 3.5 Warlock class, I'd love them forever. That's one of my favorite classes and it'd be great to see it get a Pathfinder face-lift.
Wow, okay that was longer than I expected. I make it sound like I hardly like Pathfinder, even though I do. They fixed alot of the things I didn't like about 3.5, and when you consider the thousands of rules that make up the game, I guess this is still a pretty short list.
|
I would like to set the number of classes very low, and do something quite like what was done in Star Wars Saga and d20Modern and the Pathfinder Rogue: talent trees.
Alternate class features from the APG are sort of a back door to this idea - rather than start class designs from the get go with special abilities tied to talent trees, you replace the "default" power with some other power along a theme.
Saga class levels progressions were Feat, Talent, Feat, Talent, Feat, Talent....etc.
A lot of this is already implemented under different names and slightly different subsystems on a class by class basis - why not unify all those mechanics and cut down on complexity and page count?
I would also be in the camp that wants to see 3.5 compatibility no longer be a major consideration. When two proposals for a mechanic seem to be equal, giving weight to backwards compatibility is valuable, but in all I think Pathfinder stands on its own.
I think skills need to be carefully examined so they're of equal weight. Keeping important skill functions for classes matched with class abilities makes sense too. I think perception is too valuable as is. Separating out search again makes it a little more reasonable...but then search is nearly a rogue only skill...adding it to Disable Device, which also includes open locks might be valuable, though, and operating off intelligence makes some sense. Swim and Climb are not nearly as valuable as Acrobatics, and Perform and Profession need some serious help. One possible solution are making two "tiers" of skills (the only thing I miss from 3.5 skills is the ability to put "fluff" skill points into things like professions at first level with those 4x skill points).
Iterative Attacks: They increase the complexity of running a turn, and they get progressively weaker as you advance. Versus spells, which get exponentially stronger as you get higher level spells, this is a problem. The static nature of feats versus the changes in spells available to prepared casters is another thing. Iterative attacks is a big can of worms - it's tied into some of the basic problems with the system itself, and there's no easy fix. Changing it touches on feats, class design, spellcasting, expected damage per attack and hit point balance at a minimum. And yet, I think something needs to be done.
Hmmm...rambling. Well, there's my random thoughts.
...to rename the Magoosh, Warlock.
Eliminate the "move OR make full use of your BAB" dichotomy that screws over martial classes at higher levels: either by eliminating the rule, or by adding a multiplier onto the fighters attacks that scales with level.
Earlier I stated that I don't care about 3.5 compatibility but I do want Pathfinder to maintain a D&D-like feel. As I've read more posts, a number of the suggestions/requests for a future version have fit quite nicely with my preferences. Now don’t get me wrong, I think the jump from 2e to 3e was the biggest set of improvements the game has ever undergone. My point is that I think Pathfinder Second Edition (hereafter PF2) could make a lot of system changes without losing the essential D&D feel.
- Iterative Attacks - Didn't exist until 3.0. I can think of a half dozen better ways to handle scaling melee damage and attacks.
- Full Attacks - Until 3.0 movement was independent of attacks.
- Skills – Various optional skill systems existed before 3.0, but were either fluff or simplistic.
- Damage Reduction – Introduced in 3.0. It’s a great improvement over the previous, “Can only be hit by +X weapons or greater,” but I agree that it feels overused occasionally.
- Prestige Classes – Introduced in 3.0.
|
Ability Scores
The removal of ability penalty from race. I like the +2 to two stats, but would like to see your class giving you a +2 to one stat and your race giving another. You could never stack the two. Elves could get a +2 to Dex, Int or Cha. A sorcerer would get a +2 to Cha. An elven sorcerer would get a+2 to Cha and Dex or Int.
Magic Items
No more needing to be this race to make that magic item. I like some of how 4e did magic items. Often with wanting an item like a sun blade in higher than its normal plus.
just some of my wish list
Ability Scores
The removal of ability penalty from race. I like the +2 to two stats, but would like to see your class giving you a +2 to one stat and your race giving another. You could never stack the two. Elves could get a +2 to Dex, Int or Cha. A sorcerer would get a +2 to Cha. An elven sorcerer would get a+2 to Cha and Dex or Int.Magic Items
No more needing to be this race to make that magic item. I like some of how 4e did magic items. Often with wanting an item like a sun blade in higher than its normal plus.just some of my wish list
You don't actually NEED to be an elf to make a cloak of elven kind. You just add 5 to the DC if you're not.
On that note for pathfinder 2: Clear up the magic item creation mess.
|
|
You don't actually NEED to be an elf to make a cloak of elven kind. You just add 5 to the DC if you're not.
On that note for pathfinder 2: Clear up the magic item creation mess.
I know. Paizo said they wanted to move away from needing to be a race to go into a prestige class. This seems to be the next step
Fix the stuff that slows down play or disadvantages certain classes.
I like Trailblazer's iterative attack fix. Yes iterative attack math wasn't horribly difficult but less attacks that hit at the same bonus means that I don't have to call dice or roll attacks that barely hit anyway. Simpler and actually comes out slightly better mechanically is a +1 from me.
Full Attack limited to 5' steps. Many claim that allowing full attacks and full movement would make too many monsters too powerful. Well the solution is to reduce their offensive output then ;)
Don't balance usefulness out of combat with usefulness in combat. Casters are useful both in and out of combat why should the Fighter be relatively worthless out of combat while the rogue is relatively toothless in combat?
Fix the magic item dependence. If a magic bonus is required to fight level appropriate foes then just make it inherent to the character. The current system is so dependent on getting your various bonuses at level appropriate points that all the other magic items including a lot of cool 1e -2e stuff simply isn't used because it's better to trade it for cash and upgrade your useful stuff.
Get rid of the "thou must have a divine caster" dynamic. I know that people dislike healing surges (even though they are perfectly in genre) but establishing a decentralized approach to healing was a masterful change. 3.x already incorporated this to a certain degree by making wands of CLW and Lesser Vigor de riguer after 3rd level but honestly I'd like to get away from the wand tax :D
|
|
There are certain things I like about Paizo's approach to the game.
The excessive homogeniation of magic and classes is one of the few things that leaves me cold. The ridiculous ease of magic item crafting leaves me frigid. Maybe Paizo has a particular hate for how the elves have been used as the race with mysterious secrets of war and magic, and has been looking to subvert that trope at every turn.
One of my house rules is that elves (and other races) get to keep a few secrets, such as the way to manufacture those items unique to their race.
This part I think we see eye to eye on. I would like to see the crafting of magic items to feel more magical. You want to make a flaming holy sword with just the requirements it list for that item, you pay the market price doing so. You get the help of the gold dragon Clytanmoorninyx and a celestial that serves your god, very low price.
The ridiculous ease of magic item crafting leaves me frigid.
The problem with monkeying with the magic item creation rules (not that it's an insurmountable problem) is that perhaps contrary to what you'd initially think, the more you restrict it, the more power you give the caster classes relative to the non-caster classes -- and they're already generally stronger.