| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
In this thread I have hijacked the discussion. I want to move it here.
The beginner box was created with a meticulous eye toward learn-ability and playability. I cannot commend the staff enough for the accomplishment.
I personally feel that the Core Rulebook (CRB hereafter) needs a similar treatment. I outline my major grievances with it here and here and ad nauseum throughout the thread.
What do you folks think about a rulebook product that does not obsolesce the existing CRB, but re-formats the information for maximum utility in the hands of intermediate (that is, post-beginner box) players. It would have every single rule from the CRB (and perhaps some latter-day expansions). It would be created through the same kind of play-driven approach as the Beginner Box.
Give me your opinion, and here's mine: I'm increasingly frustrated with the game at 12th level, after GMing multiple campaigns since Pathfinder Beta. I blame the organization. I think the game (3e) was laid out to reward rules mastery instead of promoting easy gameplay. I think the only section of the book that had any kind of usability sense was the Combat chapter (like 3.5 before it) and that has really distorted the play experience.
I have finally, after a long stint of fidelity, started running other RPGs. I broke my promise to finish my Pathfinder AP campaign first.
At this point, I am only interested in rules products that make the game easier to manage. The last two rulebook releases were terrific in their own way, but each seemed to compound my complexity problem. It is now too much. I know readers of this post will have a number of suggestions (mainly ignore content) but it's just how I feel.
If the aforementioned streamlining of the core rules were to happen, I could have my cake (less rules suffering) and eat it too (shiney new book). Right now, it's about the only thing I can imagine paying for. When I say streamlining, I mean presentation only, not omission of rules from the current core. Please read the bolded sentence twice.
Paizo does a great job, and this should not be mistaken for an ultimatum post, or a "I'm taking my toys and going home" post. I will always be a Pathfinder player. But until it becomes a little less high-maintenance, I might have to keep seeing other games on the side. ;)
I have already stated I would buy a slim rules reference.
What do you folks think about a rulebook product that does not obsolesce the existing CRB, but re-formats the information for maximum utility in the hands of intermediate (that is, post-beginner box) players.
If it were exactly the same rules as in the current CRB, just in a different order, I wouldn't buy it.
If it were slight different rules from the current CRB (e.g. the differences were similar to 3.0 vs. 3.5), I might buy it.
Frankly, I figure I'll just wait until PFRPG (Second Edition). I don't think Rules Compendium-style books are big sellers, but I could be wrong.
Frankly, I figure I'll just wait until PFRPG (Second Edition).
And what if said book was second edition?
Talk of a new "edition" provokes a knee-jerk reaction in people. I'm trying to avoid a thread like the "Pathfinder 1.5" thread.
I imagine that even the people (Paizo staff and otherwise) who are vehemently anti-new-edition would not so much mind seeing a re-treatment of the existing rules as a second edition.
So Hogarth, where do you draw that line? Must it make the current CRB obsolete in order to be a new edition? I know my current CRB is obsolete just by dint of being a first printing...
Of all possible paths, I think the "Pathfinder 2nd Ed: Almost exactly like Pathfinder 1st Ed" is actually the most likely. Pathfinder is the game that succeeded by not updating too much, after all.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The only problem I can see is that every edition has had 12th-15th level encounter this problem, so it seems to be inherent to D&D. I think the only way you are really going to resolve it is to accept that once you past that point, you are in epic levels, even if the charts suggest otherwise, and start treating them as such in terms of how both you, the DM, and the players approach the game. I do believe that a clearer presentation of the rules would help, but that won't change the fact that something changes at that level that requires the DM and players to adjust accordingly. What would be really helpful, even moreso than improving the presentation of the rules, is a detailed explanation of precisely what changes, why those changes occur, and suggestions of how to deal with those changes.
EDIT: The only edition that has not crashed at level 12 is 4E, and seeing what they had to change in order to achieve that, I don't see the majority of people being overly thrilled about any other attempt to do so.
I have already stated I would buy a slim rules reference.
Isn't that implicit in "superscriber?"
|
I believe that Pathfinder should be like classic games like Monopoly, where the rules don't change every 4 years. 10 years from now, the rules should essentially be the same.
That being said, you can add in 'options' as has already been done with different XP progression tracks, or playing modules at different Tiers. I'd like to see one 'option' be a basic style (as has been discussed elsewhere).
But I think PF 2.0 could have a very different presentation style. Pathfinder Beginner Box is a style that should drive this. I think
SORD SORD could be another source of inspiration to make the rules more accessible.
Another thing I'd like to see is, when rules are references, if they can be summarized in a sentence, to put those rules in-line. Particularly with Monster stats blocks, why not just put the short description of the Feat with the monster? Having to look up Feats for monsters is one pain for new GM's who haven't memorized them all.
Also, I think you should have one volume for levels 1-12, and other for 13+. It will slim things down and simplify things as most people play in the 1-12 level, and that maps to PFS play.
Just radically re-present the same rules, call it PF 2.0, maybe add a few more 'options' (basic style, whatever that might be), and I'd certainly buy that product.
The question is, would the re-orginization actually help experienced players? Can you actually re-organize the rules to make gameplay easier for people who have tread over the existing rules (or rules very much like them) hundreds if not thousands of times?
As a product for new players I approve of this. A better product to help you learn the game to expand on what is in the begginer box is a great idea. But will a layout that is easier to learn, also be easier to reference?
I have been playing 3.x since it started, and I have been part of pathfinder since the beta. I know where to look in the rules even if i dont have them all memorized. There are lots of pathfinder players like me. Would this reorganization actually help them? Probably not, we would need to re-learn where everything is, which is far more effort then just using the existing core rulebook. It might help the 2 newish players at my table but it isnt likely to help me or anyone with alot of experience with the system.
And in the end it will do basically nothing to speed up high level play as seems to be your stated goal. All that complexity is still there. I mean honestly evil lincoln is there really a rule in the game you dont know where to look up if you need it? Is there anything layout can do that reference sheets or printed spell cards/ effective character sheets cant for high level play? I really dont think so.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have already stated I would buy a slim rules reference.Isn't that implicit in "superscriber?"
Actually, as a superscriber I feel I need to be vocal about my preferences. Since my sales data is flat, the only feedback they can get is me being vocal about my preferences on the boards. If Paizo planned a product I really didn't want, I would temporarily drop a sub. I'm not a subscriber to Pathfinder Battles. I plan to pick some up, but I can't commit to a whole case.
The question is, would the re-orginization actually help experienced players? Can you actually re-organize the rules to make gameplay easier for people who have tread over the existing rules (or rules very much like them) hundreds if not thousands of times?
I firmly believe there is the potential for this, yes.
Errata have been issued, but the errrata are constrained by layout, wordcount, and other issues.
The best way to do it is to put players through testing, and find out what they aren't getting that they need.
There's definitely a limit to how much it can be improved without changing the rules; but there is clearly room for improvement without changing the rules. At least, not much.
The current stealth playtest actually exceeds the amount of change I consider necessary... but part of the problem comes from the top-level organization of the book, and that's something that can't be fixed with errata, I don't think.
The beginner box was created with a meticulous eye toward learn-ability and playability. I cannot commend the staff enough for the accomplishment.
Knowing that usability is your line of work, this is high praise. Thank you!
The beginner box was created with a meticulous eye toward learn-ability and playability. I cannot commend the staff enough for the accomplishment.Knowing that usability is your line of work, this is high praise. Thank you!
You're welcome!
"Line of study" might be more accurate. :)
I also work in Quality Assurance, so I know a thing or two about usability. And one thing we run into all the time is a heavy resistance to change. People who put in the time to learn how the old product works do not want to have to adapt to a reorganized version of that product simply because its 'easier' to use. It has to be 'better' with added or improved features, and in this case that means rules changes.
The core rulebook is in many ways an incomprehensible tome. Except that its OUR incomprehensible tome. The location of most of the information has been in a similar place for more then a decade. We know it and use it every day. How much in the way of 'growing pains' would a re-organization of said information inflict? I think it would be quite alot, and if it still has the same rules, it isnt going to make any gameplay improvements. For me that means few existing players would bother to pick it up.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The question is, would the re-orginization actually help experienced players? Can you actually re-organize the rules to make gameplay easier for people who have tread over the existing rules (or rules very much like them) hundreds if not thousands of times?
BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!
Oh, wow, thanks for the laugh. Felt good. :)
Okay, all teasing aside, I'd like to point out that I spend more time correcting experienced players than new ones. Thing is, an experienced player tends to assume he already knows how things work - after all, he's been playing for X years! Sure, he knows where to look something up; he just doesn't know that he needs to look it up.
And even aside from the need for an easy reference for those few veterans who are aware that they don't have everything accurately memorized, consider this: lots of people (including experienced players) find the reference material on the back of the GM screen to be extremely helpful. Wouldn't this be just somewhere between that and the CRB? Surely there's a place for such a reference.
I'm in favor of exactly what Evil Lincoln suggests. Especially if it's paperback for easy flipping.
The question is, would the re-orginization actually help experienced players? Can you actually re-organize the rules to make gameplay easier for people who have tread over the existing rules (or rules very much like them) hundreds if not thousands of times?BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!
Oh, wow, thanks for the laugh. Felt good. :)
Okay, all teasing aside, I'd like to point out that I spend more time correcting experienced players than new ones. Thing is, an experienced player tends to assume he already knows how things work - after all, he's been playing for X years! Sure, he knows where to look something up; he just doesn't know that he needs to look it up.
I am by no means assuming those players know the rules backwards and forwards. What I am saying is a re-organization wont serve them. As you stated, those players dont know they need to look up a rule so what is in the book wont matter. And if they somehow discovered they need to look it up, they know where to look. So the reorganization doesnt change anything for them.
And even aside from the need for an easy reference for those few veterans who are aware that they don't have everything accurately memorized, consider this: lots of people (including experienced players) find the reference material on the back of the GM screen to be extremely helpful. Wouldn't this be just somewhere between that and the CRB? Surely there's a place for such a reference.
Do you think it would? I think the gm screen is useful because you can keep it out and available for easy reference. If it were in the book, most of the time it wouldnt be available for reference because you would be on another page. The fact that the gm screen rules are PULLED OUT of the larger book and can be referenced independently is the reason it is worthwhile. If they were just tucked into an apendix or something, it wouldnt serve you any good because you would still have to page through the book to find it. A book that is likely being referenced by someone else for something else at the time.
Having an external reference like a gm screen means you can always glance at it without much trouble. If you just put that in the book it is no different then the rest of the rules.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I must admit, the Condition card deck has been a very useful tool in keeping my game going with minimal rules references. I highly recommend it.
I just wish I had some for spells.
I also work in Quality Assurance, so I know a thing or two about usability.
From the bottom of my heart, I know that you do.
And one thing we run into all the time is a heavy resistance to change. People who put in the time to learn how the old product works do not want to have to adapt to a reorganized version of that product simply because its 'easier' to use. It has to be 'better' with added or improved features, and in this case that means rules changes.
The core rulebook is in many ways an incomprehensible tome. Except that its OUR incomprehensible tome. The location of most of the information has been in a similar place for more then a decade. We know it and use it every day. How much in the way of 'growing pains' would a re-organization of said information inflict? I think it would be quite alot, and if it still has the same rules, it isnt going to make any gameplay improvements. For me that means few existing players would bother to pick it up.
Well, it looks like we agree more than we differ.
It is Paizo's decision whether to prioritize retention or acquisition.
I believe the former is a weaker path, because you are not bringing new players in your player base can only shrink, and you are also losing some folks (like me) to frustration with the status quo.
The best option is to leave the rules sacrosanct so the CRB is still valid, but have a book that's useful for the newcomers and frustrated veteran players. I've seen a lot of "hell yeahs" from frustrated veteran players on this topic.
It's sort of a false dichotomy though. You could include veteran players in the testing and ensure that you are meeting their needs too. Nobody is advocating burning the bridge to Grognardia and making changes that upset the existing players — I'm talking about change on a smaller order than that.
Ideally, the CRB would still be valid for play.
Well, it looks like we agree more than we differ.
It is Paizo's decision whether to prioritize retention or acquisition.
I think the former is a weaker path, because you are not bringing new players in your player base can only shrink, and you are also losing some folks (like me) to frustration with the status quo.
Things like the begginer box will grow the player base, and just enthusiasm for existing players. I myself have converted 9 people to pathfinder, who now buy pathfinder products. Retention is key to growth in a social hobby. Those gronards still need people to play with. And gaming groups often come and go.
And there is the practical issue. This would be a major undertaking for paizo. It would be an expensive one in terms of human time, and cost of production. If only a small portion of the existing player base (those frustrated with the status que many of which who want MORE then just a re-organization) find use for the product, it wont sell well enough to justify it. A big book like this that flops could put the whole line in jeapardy. Thats not really a risk i want to see paizo take.
It's sort of a false dichotomy though. You could include veteran players in the testing and ensure that you are meeting their needs too. Nobody is advocating burning the bridge to Grognardia and making changes that upset the existing players — I'm talking about change on a smaller order than that.
Ideally, the CRB would still be valid for play.
I understand that that is your stated goal, but I think it is simply an issue of not enough to warrant the cost, both on paizos side and on our side. If all the rules are still the same just laid out differently, and I know where to look for them in the old book, i dont need the new book. Without legitimate rule changes(pathfinder 1.5) this book wont sell.
Frankly, I figure I'll just wait until PFRPG (Second Edition).And what if said book was second edition?
Then I must be misunderstanding you. I probably wouldn't consider a book that just "re-formats the information for maximum utility" to be a new edition.
Of all possible paths, I think the "Pathfinder 2nd Ed: Almost exactly like Pathfinder 1st Ed" is actually the most likely. Pathfinder is the game that succeeded by not updating too much, after all.
It depends on what you mean by "almost exactly". I suspect a 2nd Edition Pathfinder RPG would be about as similar to the current PFRPG as 3.5 D&D is to 3.0 D&D, with the possible exception of . I.e., very similar but different enough that any claims of 99% compatibility would be highly disputed.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
If all the rules are still the same just laid out differently, and I know where to look for them in the old book, i dont need the new book.
Hm... Seems that EL's complaint is that he doesn't always know where to look in the old book, because it's not where you'd think it is. (Perhaps examples would help.)
So perhaps what we're looking at here is that there's Kolokotroni's segment of the population, where they know the layout like the back of their hands; and there's EL's segment of the population, where they find the layout frustrating.
And the question is this: which segment is bigger? Kolokotroni seems to think the "knows the layout already" group is a larger segment of the player base, while EL (though not making a comparison) says that the "frustrated" group might be sufficiently large to warrant such a reorganization.
I understand that that is your stated goal, but I think it is simply an issue of not enough to warrant the cost, both on paizos side and on our side. If all the rules are still the same just laid out differently, and I know where to look for them in the old book, i dont need the new book. Without legitimate rule changes(pathfinder 1.5) this book wont sell.
You're not wrong about any of that.
My concept, I think, includes room for a full-blown Pathfinder 2nd Edition that just happens to be not-too-different from 1st edition.
Editions don't have to be revolutionary, although that's what the RPG industry seems to favor, I don't think it is necessary for Pathfinder's success. They're not really selling the rules, they're selling the game.
You have good points, but I am still arguing from the perspective of what I want and what I would buy. And I'm a pretty heavily invested customer, as evinced by the two-foot-high stack of books to my immediate left.
In any case, no matter what, No Fractional Editions. I cannot stress that enough. If, for some gods-forsaken reason they adopt fractional edition notation, it had better be Pathfinder 1.1!
@Hogarth: It is entirely possible that I am not 100% certain what I want. I'm pretty sure we've established a spectrum that includes many different possibilities, all of them acceptable to me. Even then, what I think I want may not actually be what I want. :)
It's the discussion that matters.
Hm... Seems that EL's complaint is that he doesn't always know where to look in the old book, because it's not where you'd think it is. (Perhaps examples would help.)
Well, that, and the fact that sometimes the official answer to "where to look" is "the d20 srd". Leveling up, for example. Or Treasure.
These are unfortunate, understandable side-effects of the merging of the PHB and DMG and abiding by the OGL. They only had so much time, and they did a fine job considering, but it is time to move on, I think.
It's not so much that I don't know where to look, it's more like I need to look in multiple places to confirm what I know. There's so much potential for players to cry foul because of the way the rules are scattered about. It looks like there is almost none of that going on in the Beginner Box, and that's not due to omission but organization.
I must admit, the Condition card deck has been a very useful tool in keeping my game going with minimal rules references. I highly recommend it.
Pardon the "me too" post, but: Seconded. :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure how to best market the darn thing, but yes, I would love a book like this. Probably would be best to just call it what it would be called if it weren't a role-playing game: Second edition. But again, NO RULES WOULD CHANGE -- just the organization and presentation. If you sold that message hard enough, and it turned out to be true, then I think it just might work. The $50 cost of a new book would be irrelevant to me -- especially if I ended up with a 384 or 448 page book to boot.
Maybe we could even take back the word "edition."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not going to shell out 50 bucks for a visual re-do of existing material.
Now, if that was Pathfinder 2.0 with rules changes that would be to PF 1.0 what PF 1.0 was to 3.5 - sure, no probs.
But the beauty part is that you wouldn't have to -- none of the rules would have changed. People who want to keep using their existing CRB could, and those who wanted to get the newer revision could do so.
But the beauty part is that you wouldn't have to -- none of the rules would have changed. People who want to keep using their existing CRB could, and those who wanted to get the newer revision could do so.I'm not going to shell out 50 bucks for a visual re-do of existing material.
Now, if that was Pathfinder 2.0 with rules changes that would be to PF 1.0 what PF 1.0 was to 3.5 - sure, no probs.
This is a prime example of what I am talking about. Gorbacz doesnt want JUST a reorganization of the rules, he wants a modification of the rules (based on the things we have since learned) that is a new edition of pathfinder and it is a completely different discussion then what evil lincoln is talking about.
But the beauty part is that you wouldn't have to -- none of the rules would have changed. People who want to keep using their existing CRB could, and those who wanted to get the newer revision could do so.I'm not going to shell out 50 bucks for a visual re-do of existing material.
Now, if that was Pathfinder 2.0 with rules changes that would be to PF 1.0 what PF 1.0 was to 3.5 - sure, no probs.
I think there are a couple of stumbling blocks here:
(1) If redoing the book as "the exact same rules, but better organized" were so simple, presumably they would have put the rules in the organized format in the first place. So I suspect it would take a non-trivial amount of effort to do.
(2) Even if it were fairly straightforward to rewrite the existing rules in a more attractive format, I'm skeptical whether that would substantially increase sales of the Core Rulebook. Frankly, I don't think there's a huge untapped market of people who are refraining from buying the CRB on the sole grounds that it's disorganized.
Don't get me wrong -- I like the idea of a reorganization (e.g. no hiding important rules in the middle of a paragaph in an unrelated chapter!), along the lines of the Rules Compendium. But I don't really think it's a money-earner. I could be wrong, of course. Maybe that's a niche that a third-party publisher could profitably fill.
I think there are a couple of stumbling blocks here:(1) If redoing the book as "the exact same rules, but better organized" were so simple, presumably they would have put the rules in the organized format in the first place. So I suspect it would take a non-trivial amount of effort to do.
I do not doubt that one bit. :)
(2) Even if it were fairly straightforward to rewrite the existing rules in a more attractive format, I'm skeptical whether that would substantially increase sales of the Core Rulebook. Frankly, I don't think there's a huge untapped market of people who are refraining from buying the CRB on the sole grounds that it's disorganized.Don't get me wrong -- I like the idea of a reorganization (e.g. no hiding important rules in the middle of a paragaph in an unrelated chapter!). But I don't really think it's a money-earner. I could be wrong, of course. Maybe that's a niche that a third-party publisher could profitably fill.
I would argue that a clear, concise core might ultimately lead to acquiring more customers, and -- perhaps more importantly -- keeping those customers around longer.
I'm not saying I can make the argument that the investment really is justified -- just that I believe the question goes beyond "does this particular SKU generate enough revenue?" The only thing I can say for sure is: I would buy it. :)
This is a prime example of what I am talking about. Gorbacz doesnt want JUST a reorganization of the rules, he wants a modification of the rules (based on the things we have since learned) that is a new edition of pathfinder and it is a completely different discussion then what evil lincoln is talking about.
Honestly, that would be nice too. But if we can't have that, a re-org and clean-up would be the next best thing. :)
What about a step-by-step approach to the notion proposed by OP:
A steady release of slim rule books on a one-every-two-months basis, similar to Pathfinder Companions. Each slim book would be roughly 32 pages and cover in detail a relevant rules section.
For example: "Skills", covers all the skills in greater detail with related content all in the same book. (Currently some rule elements for one thing are in disparate sections of the core rules.) This could be followed by a book on "Magic" (the rules and concepts involved) and "Combat".
Each slim book can expand on its subject matter a bit; such as providing additional uses for skills, more skill DCs, etc
The advantage of such an approach is that with initial design on the one hand and the feedback on the other hand, you end up with a thorough and easy-to-use rules system; which can ultimately be reprinted in a collective work known as Pathfinder 1.5 (or whatever).
This is my order of value for the next 'printing'.
1- 'Re-organized for usability'. This would help both old timers and newcomers.
2- Incorporating optional rules to make to rules easier for beginners. For example, default feats and skills that are always selected for your class. Later on you can introduce the concept of selecting different feats and skills.
3- Rule tweaks. What Paizo would have done different if they had omnipotence and infinite resources.
I am also assuming that errata would be addressed.
I'm not going to shell out 50 bucks for a visual re-do of existing material.
Maybe not yet, but there will come a time where everyone needs to re-buy because their old books are falling apart. It would be nice if the new printing is better organized. And I think if it was better organized, people would adopt it sooner.
This is a prime example of what I am talking about. Gorbacz doesnt want JUST a reorganization of the rules, he wants a modification of the rules (based on the things we have since learned) that is a new edition of pathfinder and it is a completely different discussion then what evil lincoln is talking about.Honestly, that would be nice too. But if we can't have that, a re-org and clean-up would be the next best thing. :)
I think a nicely organized "P.5" version is a much more realistic request than a "same, but better-looking" version. But on the other hand, whenever a new edition comes out, there's going to be some squawking.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even if it were fairly straightforward to rewrite the existing rules in a more attractive format, I'm skeptical whether that would substantially increase sales of the Core Rulebook.
The value of re-organization and simplifying the rules (while not changing the rules mechanics themselves) goes way beyond the sale of the Core Rulebook. Most of Paizo's money is coming from other books such as the Adventure Path modules. If you can get more people playing the game, and a new, newbie-friendly format can assist in this, it will broaden the player base and sales overall.
I for one have fallen away from Pathfinder because of just the usability issue. I didn't come from the 3.x days, and trying to master the Core rules is simply too daunting. Beginner Box gives me hope of mastering the rules. I'm a busy dad, and time is precious. I need this usability or I won't be playing Pathfinder, I'll be playing Savage Worlds or something that is approachable for someone new to the hobby who doesn't have a lot of time to pour over the rules.
|
|
I will agree that if a new version of the CRB were available and my copy was starting to look a little haggard from use, I would be quicker to buy the new reorganized & revised book rather than the same book I already have. I do not know that it would ultimately be (monetarily) worth the time and effort that the Paizo staff would have to throw into this project. But, there is a definate bifurcation in the gamer community, those of us who like the new and shiny, and those of us who relish the battered and worn. The bridge to Grognardia is paved with original Yellow second ed players handbooks that are missing pages and parts of the spine, and original Black first ed books that are so worn that the covers are mostly white and you can't tell the PHB from the DMG without openning them. I like the new shiny but the money situation (read as Wife) does not always allow me to purchase new books, especially if they look like the old books. A new revied book would look different, be better organized, and would make a great gift for the annual run of holidays and birthdays.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have introduced a new set of players (3) who are completely Tabletop/Dice RPG newbies with the Beginner Box and they LOVE it and we are having a blast. My sad face comes from the fact that not a one of them wants anything to do with a 600 page book "to progress into". When we get to 5th level I am going to lose these players because of the size and for one of them layout of the CRB.
The only way I am going to keep my new favorite players is to "Basicize" the rest of the PF game.
HAH. My time is too important.
I would love to see and/or/all a redesigned CRB, a Basic 2 box for 6-10 or ideally... here comes that great heretical moment: Cut the damn thing up. The entire reason I got into PF was that everything I needed was in one book. One $50 purchase and bam I had a version of 3.+ I could stomach. Now there are how many books that you need to memorize? Arguments aside from forum members etc, to play the game the way the game is progressing, you are expected to own, know, and use CRB, APG, UM, UC, and however many bestiaries they desire to throw out. The "CRB is one book" mantra is dead. Cut it up.
Classes and Races in one place along with combat. Hit print. Get magic items out of it. Get Spells into what UM should have been. You just resold the CRB in many books, made it less daunting on new players that do not worship what 3.x was and make Pathfinder the game Paizo has proven it is able to make.
I welcome a revision with open arms and even better yet an open wallet.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you Evil Lincoln for starting this thread. I have several points that I would like to add to the conversation.
First, one example of things being spread out and hard to find is the rules for tumbling though an enemy occupied square. (Thanks to Drogon for pointing this out to me.) That is the best example that I have heard so far of hard to reference rules in the CRB.
Second, put me in the "hell yeah" category. I want a CRB that is more usable than the current one. A drastic reorganization is necessary. This does not require a Pathfinder 1.5. In fact changing the rules to a 1.5 edition would lose me as a Paizo customer. It is unnecessary. I will give an example in Chaosium. The Call of Cthulhu rules are in their sixth edition now. They are still compatible with the first edition as published in the 1980's. The rules have never had a drastic change like 2e->3e->3.5->4e editions have. Guess what, Chaosium is still in business. They still sell product. They even reprint supplements every now-and-then and sell them even though supplements which were published in the 1980's are compatible with sixth edition. They don't require a drastic rewrite every few years to sell more product. They have a sustainable business model built around a stable ruleset. If Chaosium can do it, so can Paizo.
Third, I agree with Dwilimir. I didn't play much 3.x and am having a hard time mastering the rules for PFRPG. I even read through the CRB cover to cover and have been playing PFS three to four sessions every month for a year now. I need a book with a more usable layout.
Fourth, I would also like a more modular game. I like the Beginner Box. I like the rules-lite presentation. Presenting the rules in a way that makes it easy to create "Pathfinder Basic" using the CRB would be a good thing if Paizo won't turn the BB into its own line. I don't have time or inclination to disentangle the rules.
Fifth, I would like to see all the classes in one place, all the feats in one place, all the spells in one place, etc. I don't like having to cart around CRB, APG, Ultimate Magic, Ultimate Combat, and more.
Sixth, there is one thing that I would remove from the CRB completely. Get rid of the Prestige Classes. I am playing an Arcane Trickster in PFS. He is level 10. Compared to other single-class level 9-10 characters he is rather weak. The base classes are so good in Pathfinder (especially once you add in Archetypes) that the Prestige Classes are pointless dead weight. I think they can be dropped completely from the game with nobody shedding a tear. None of the other PFS players that I know here in Colorado use the Pr Classes in the CRB.
|
My concept, I think, includes room for a full-blown Pathfinder 2nd Edition that just happens to be not-too-different from 1st edition.
Editions don't have to be revolutionary, although that's what the RPG industry seems to favor, I don't think it is necessary for Pathfinder's success. They're not really selling the rules, they're selling the game.
....
In any case, no matter what, No Fractional Editions. I cannot stress that enough. If, for some gods-forsaken reason they adopt fractional edition notation, it had better be Pathfinder 1.1!
What's the real difference between Pathfinder 1.5 and Pathfinder 2 (barely changed edition)? Do you feel that slightly changing the title makes it more worth spending money on?
3.5 had a Rules Compendium. I found it pretty useful. But it also seemed to have presaged the death knell for the system. I think if Paizo came out with one for Pathfinder, several things would happen:
1. Reasonable people like some of us here, would find it very useful.
2. The more speculative would compare it to the 3.5 release mentioned above, and begin asking whether Pathfinder was about to be given an overhaul.
3. Unreasonable people would start endless threads in the forums about how Paizo was just trying to milk every last dollar out of us by putting out "unnecessary product."
Personally, I agree that the organization in the core book is somewhat lacking. (I'd like to see the Bestiary a bit better organized, as well). What would be awesome would be a simplified pdf Rules Compendium with better organization, a thorough index, and which is completely hyperlinked throughout.
What's the real difference between Pathfinder 1.5 and Pathfinder 2 (barely changed edition)? Do you feel that slightly changing the title makes it more worth spending money on?
I feel that fractional editions are meaningless and silly.
In the case of 3.5, it was very much a result of the "pseudotech" jargon like "Web 2.0" that pervaded the media at that time of release, but although it was trying to sound like software version numbering it conveys none of the meaning.
Fractional numbers also pervade the myth that "edition" means a fundamental change in the ruleset.
I agree but would probably want to cut/streamline rules as well and have it be a new edition.
We're starting a new AP and deliberately not using UC and UM by consensus - it's just too much fiddly nonsense. I think there's more than presentation that could be done to boil down the useful parts in the core rules - you could fit the actual useful content from the PHB and APH into one 250 page book, and I'd like that game a lot more.
For a customer who bought two CRB and intend to buy the beginner box, I will NOT buy the reorganized books. Unless they include some rule changes or an overhaul, in this case it's better just do a second edition. And I dare say if Paizo came up with second edition right now they would definitely lose many, many customers.
As I stated over in another thead I feel that right now is a key time for Paizo to break free of the 3.5 design shackles. When they made the Pathfinder Core Rulebook it was essentially an extremely close word for word (excluding the changes of course) combination of the Player/GM books with a few chapters swapped around.
While that was good to update for existing players at the time of release to get the ball rolling, over time the ball slows down and needs some new momentum to bowl people over. The Beginner Box is the first step in keeping the ball moving along the path. It is a small push in the big picture though. What the ball really needs to help it get a surge in momentum is a way to plow over the new Beginner Box players who rather jump out of the way of it.
The ways to do that are to evolve, not redefine, the rules that they are asked to move onto. This is why I keep suggestion the Rules Compendium style approach of Paizo taking the existing 4th printing of CRB and making it their own and not a reskinned version of the 3.5 books. This would be a 5th printing of the CRB with only minor changes that people could choose to buy if they did not just want to live with using the errata for the existing 4th printing while presenting the current rules in a cleaner/clearer focus going forward.
To evolve the CRB into a new refined book would be best done by looking over all the chapters to start with. Here is the existing CRB chapter layout along with some basic suggestions. This is based on keeping it as one book and not two which would honestly make the GM book itself look rather underwhelming in light of the GameMastery Guide.
1.0 Getting Started
- Using This Book: This is essentially what is located in the Introduction section of later rulebooks. (Perfect)
- Common Terms: Unless you are defining every single term is is best to really move individual entries toward the sections they are associated with.
- Example of Play: While some might find this interesting it has always screamed of useless to me due to the reason that you should learn how play works by reading the book itself and not a brief game log.
- Generating a Character: For me this section is out of place and should be rolled into a chapter entitled Character Creation.
- Ability Scores: This should be rolled into the Character Creation chapter.
2. Races
- This chapter is fine as is.
3. Classes
- Character Advancement could be rolled into the Character Creation chapter.
4. Skills
- Overall the presentation is fine. This is the first section to include the very helpful "Descriptions" entry which would be very helpful at the start of other chapters. This ties in with the common terms note in Getting Started.
5. Feats
- See Skills.
6. Equipment
- Wealth and Money: Starting Character Wealth should probably be rolled into the Class chapter.
- The rest of the chapter is fine although I would probably put Special Materials but with the inclusion of basic types such as iron, wood, and so at the start of the chapter. I would also probably move the location of the chapter itself.
7. Additional Rules
- Alignment: This should be in the Character Creation chapter instead of further into the book. Include a note on strictness ranges of using alignments.
- Vital Statistics: Moved to Character Creation chapter.
- Carrying Capacity: Would be better of in the Strength entry.
- Movement: This isn't really an additional rule, it is A rule. It should be presented that way like other rules that are not in fact "additional" but really essential. Probably the best spot would be rolled into Combat.
- Exploration
--Vision and Light: This should be part of a "Race Description" section in the Race chapter.
--Breaking and Entering: This should probably be in the Equipment section.
8. Combat
- There are a few areas which could be moved around a bit to clear things up here.
9. Magic
- Some of this chapter could be moved to various other chapters. A huge example of this is how Special Abilities is referenced earlier but does not show up until this chapter.
- Perhaps Combat and Magic need to be rolled into one chapter.
10. Spells
- Spell lists seem to make more sense being included in the Classes chapter than in this chapter.
11. Prestige Classes
- This chapter should probably be rolled into the end of the Classes chapter.
12. Gamemastering
- This chapter is fine with perhaps a thing moved here and there.
13. Environment
- Much of this could probably see better location in various other chapters.
14. Creating NPCs
- Roll it into the Gamemastering portion of the book.
15. Magic Items
- For the most part this chapter is fine except it might be beneficial to have it located along with the Equipment chapter/section of the book.
Appendix 1: Special Abilities
- Most of this is in other locations or should be included in other chapters.
Appendix 2: Conditions
- Should be rolled into the Combat chapter.
Appendix 3: Inspiring Reading
- You should check some of those out if you have yet to do so.
Appendix 4: Game Aids
- Saved for last which is fine.
Character Sheet
- Might be helpful to include a filled out example in the Character Creation chapter.
Pathfinder RPG Index
- Make the appropriate changes to update to the new book.
The only way I am going to keep my new favorite players is to "Basicize" the rest of the PF game....... to play the game the way the game is progressing, you are expected to own, know, and use CRB, APG, UM, UC, and however many bestiaries they desire to throw out. The "CRB is one book" mantra is dead. Cut it up.
Classes and Races in one place along with combat. Hit print. Get magic items out of it. Get Spells into what UM should have been. You just resold the CRB in many books
You realize these are two contradictory aims, yes?
The main reason of why it's easier for beginners to get into the Beginner's Box, aside from the hold-your-hand approach and the visual presentation, is the fact that it strips options and limits you to the first 5 levels.
Consolidating all the Feats from the CRB, APG, UM, and UC alone into one chart is enough to overwhelm a new player looking for their first feat at 1st level.
I'm for a new "edition" (using the traditional definition of the word). Perhaps the best analogue to D&D's history would be Holmes' edition of the original D&D rules. He reorganized the information and made it both a better learning tool and a better reference.
A new edition should confine itself to the CRB, however. The CRB already has tons of options already. And I agree also that it should be "modular" and point out what rules are optional. It should also list suggested "beginner" feats and spells to help people who are overwhelmed by the number of options.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
|
|
3.5 had a Rules Compendium. I found it pretty useful. But it also seemed to have presaged the death knell for the system.
The thing is, the best time for a Rules Compendium is at the end of a system's lifetime. Otherwise, it ends up being fairly incomplete. Imagine if Paizo had put out a such a Rules Compendium right after the GMG, covering topics from the CRB, B1, and GMG. Then the APG, UM, and UC come out, and the Rules Compendium isn't really all that relevent anymore.