Guys, this isn't a stealth thread. Don't make it one. Agree to disagree, please. Make a new thread or necromancy one of many if you like. Even take it to PM. Avoid thread-jacking if possible, please.
I may have been slightly harsh before, so let me make one thing clear - I play Pathfinder willingly because it is the best system I know for Fantasy. I do play in a fantasy GURPS game, but it just isn't the same. Even when I make a character close to what I want, it just isn't the same. If I were to find another, I may migrate or not, based on the inclinations of the group. Even if we could only get 4 players or so, that would probably be sufficient for me (assuming the game is designed for a number of players like PF - it seems most tabletop RPGs are).
A lot of my beef comes from one other thing - my friends I play with all seem to have different interests than I do for how they like to play the game, and it seems like my personal preferences always take a backseat. Which is interesting, because the thing I really want to do is intra-party RP - that is, RP with other party members beyond that absolute necessary communication to do our job. While everyone seems to like RPing well enough, it's always with NPCs. Never other party members. There are other things, but I can't very well tell everyone to play the way I want to play.
This is mitigated now that I am running the game, and have no emotional investment in my characters, like when I am a PC. I'm...content with PF, but I will have no problem if I drop it should I find another fantasy game that is suitable for my tastes.
Which is interesting, because the thing I really want to do is intra-party RP - that is, RP with other party members beyond that absolute necessary communication to do our job. While everyone seems to like RPing well enough, it's always with NPCs. Never other party members. There are other things, but I can't very well tell everyone to play the way I want to play.
This is mitigated now that I am running the game, and have no emotional investment in my characters, like when I am a PC. I'm...content with PF, but I will have no problem if I drop it should I find another fantasy game that is suitable for my tastes.
You know, doing RP has nothing to do with the system, but more with each players and each group.
If you want to do more RP scenes between your group members, you have to talk to other players, and tell them what you're looking for in a RPG. That way, either they will consider what you propose, and try to improve themself into that part of the game, or they will ignore what you said, and stay where you are now. Changing the game will do nothing for that.
Of course. But I also have something to do with it. I don't think I'm very good at RP myself. No doubt that makes it harder on others.
Like singing. I love to sing. I am God-awful at it, though. But I still love it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am very happy with pathfinder!
To the OP.
Yes lots, but they don't haunt the forums.
Most forums of any sort will rot your mind worse than junk food, heavy metal and Beavis and Butthead reruns.
|
When do they get that perception check? How many times? Define “might notice you”. When do you make that stealth...Go post your new stealth rules with two extra sentences over on the Rules questions forum and see how far you get.In the stealth skill :
My modification to the stealth skill is in bolded text wrote (I quoted, for more clarity) :Check: Your Stealth check is opposed by the Perception check of anyone who might notice you. Every creature that lose the opposed perception check lose their DEX bonus against the first attack you make against them this turn. You can move up to half your normal speed and use Stealth at no penalty. When moving at a speed greater than half but less than your normal speed, you take a –5 penalty. It's impossible to make a stealth check while running or charging. [deleted Attacking]
If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't make a Stealth check. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to make a Stealth check. If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to make a Stealth check. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Stealth check if you can get to an unobserved place of some kind. This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast.
That was done in 10 minutes. I didn't even have to do anything to other parts of the game. And I'm not an expert in english, as I'm french (so, I didn't use the best grammar or anything else to formulate my modification). And it works as intended (you use stealth with success => your target lose their DEX bonus, and by such, can be sneak attacked, by the first attack, exactly like invisibility [a +2 bonus going with invisibility]).
EDIT : I suppose I should include the modification in the Perception skill too. That would effectively add 2 sentences to the rules of the game.
Exactly.
Also exactly why I play 'common sense, made by DM adjudication, overrules written rules'...and I rule for what makes an adventure work...and make an attempt to be consistent. *shrug*
I doubt Stealth will ever be written in a way that's definitive. I try to rule in favor of good thinking. Example: Scent is one of the hardest things to fool, but if someone with good understanding of stealth (more than a rank or 2) has been around dogs, they understand this. Making an appropriate roll will find them something that will give them scent-stealth...assuming they try. Though...be warned, those noses are usually very good!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
When I first started playing PF, I loved it. But, I only had a cursory knowledge of the rules on the surface.
The more I played, the less I cared for it. Meh.
Not really a fan of the setting, either. Just feels too cluttered and clunky, trying to do too many things at once.
And I beg for a Neverwinter style game using the PFruleset that updates as new books come out.
And isn't an MMO.
This +10000000000000
I don't want an MMO.There absolutely, positively cannot be a game like this, ever.
Unfortunately, the rules for the OGL that Pathfinder was born from largely preclude the creation of a game using those core elements in it, which is why the Pathfinder MMO in development by Goblinworks doesn't actually use the Pathfinder system.
I was heartbroken when I learned this, personally.
Actually, they can, now. The thing is the developers have stated that they chose to not use the d20 mechanic because it doesn't actually translate well to a computer game. They decided to go for the feel of Golarion, rather than quibble over basic mechanics.
|
|
Runequest is as perfect a system as I've ever seen. Second edition. :pWas that the one they supposedly borrowed a lot from when making 3e? I can't remember, but it was either that or Rolemaster. I've never played either game, this is just something I have heard.
3e D&D?
They're dramatically different. There might have been some concepts that helped work out the skill system, but they aren't very similar. If you change the d20 to d100, it does seem similar, to some small degree, but it's still quite different.
I'm sure some of the devs have experience with RQ...but I doubt it was really borrowed from.
Runequest is as perfect a system as I've ever seen. Second edition. :pWas that the one they supposedly borrowed a lot from when making 3e? I can't remember, but it was either that or Rolemaster. I've never played either game, this is just something I have heard.
Rolemaster. Monte Cook worked on Rolemaster. I was a Rolemaster fan prior to finding Conan OGL which ultimately led me back to D&D 3e and evenutally Pathfinder.
Elves with low-light vision, dwarves with darkvision, the skill system, some of the fluff all were recognizable to me as Rolemaster influences.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To answer the OPs question. Yes I am happy with Pathfinder. There are of course small things i like to change here and there, like I have kept the use rope skill in my home games.....but that is what the designers expect, for us players to make the game our own.
So in summary, yes I am happy with Pathfinder. I think Paizo does an excellent job. They go to great lengths to make us feel part of a community, they listen to our opinions, and I think do their best to write stories and gaming books we can all enjoy.
Are you going to be happy with Pathfinder in 1 year ? 2 years ? 5 years ? 20 years ?
even the best and most perfect gaming system in the world can become stale if people get to know it too well and see no change ;)
I'm perfectly happy with it. I've never been anything, but. I don't think anything about it broken or imbalanced, and if I did, I'd just work around it without complaint. It's a game. It's not life or death.
As to whether all people need to become bored with it after time, that is a matter of taste and preference. There are people out there who think 1st or 2nd Edition is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and still play those. When I get bored with a system, I simply play something else until I feel like playing it again.
I guess one could relate it to eating out at a restaurant
If a Restaurant make one dish perfectly and everything else is just meh are you the sort of person that will always order the same thing from that restaurant because its always good or will your try the other things they have just to be different ?
Me personally if I want to try something different I go to a different restaurant , if I want to eat what that one restaurant makes really well i to there for it specifically.
perhaps the same could be said for pathfinder, play PF when you want to taste that PF goodness, and when you feel like something different don't eat here go out and try something else knowing you can always come back to PF for what you know is good.
|
|
I'm fairly happy. Liked the basic setting and rules as-is, and recent books fleshed out some play options I wanted. Do I want more things that will make me happier still? Sure. Am I happy? Yes.
Basically there are shades of satisfied, and I am mostly satisfied. The things I am lacking, I press Paizo to make so I can send them more money. If they make it, cool; I spend cash. If not, I live with what I have presently and will be mostly happy with it. Seems like a decent arrangement.
Love Pathfinder for that D&D feeling.
still thinks that it is a bit too complicated...
GRU
|
|
For the most part like most of what I have seen. Even though it is 3.5 with a very few new bits added to it. Not a complaint I knew that it would be unchanged mostly to ensure backwards comptiabilty. As well they made sure to advertise that.
For the most part satisfied with PF. Like some parts of it. Wish they had put more thought into some feats, archtypes. Some are imo not worth the paper they are printed on. And the Monk debacle oy the Monk. Less said about that the better. To the Op people who like the system usually are not very vocal about it. Those that don't like a rpg or certain elements of it tend to be the more vocal. And sometimes posters on this forum and others are not truly interested in actually debating a topic. They atart a thread with is "xyzz broken?" Don't get enough posts to validate their poistion get angry and the we have the endless "I'm right. No your wrong I'm right dammit" that we sometimes see here. As well sometimes people have nothing better to do then complain because they can. A
As a example gamers are the only consumer group I know that complain when a rpg company release a steady stream of product. Blaming Paizo for making them spend money and because they can't say no to players. When Paizo is doing the smart thing and ensuring that they get a steady flow of revenue to stay in business. How many people complain when a new Iphone or Ipad gets released. The same onse who complain when a rpg is too different yet also complain when the developers don't change enough.
I'm not happy with just pathfinder but i'm going to buy the ultimate campaign PDF when it is available. I have gone back to AD&D 2nd ed and retroclones. Been playing 3rd ed for over 12 years now and I like running PF adventure paths I am over designing my own stuff for PF as I am sick of wrestling with the rules which are still 3.5 based.
Still like Paizo as my favorite RPG business and have been buying their stuff since 2002 or so. Will play PF again in the future it is just competing with d20 AD&D retroclones for my gaming time.
Never thought I'd say this... I'm so–so (as in Meh) happy with PF.
As the years go by, I find myself missing the simpler days when the game was more "product ofy our imagination" and less tactical. The main thing at this point stopping me from running games is the constantly stopping to map things (once in awhile is good for the major battles).
I do like the cleaned up rules of PFRPG, but the campaign setting is wearing on me with the exception of Varisia, the Riverlands, and the country from the CC ap (I forget the name at this time). I'm more of Greyhawk or Aereth setting type of guy.
Overall, it's the tactical aspect pushing me closer to leaving the hobby behind for good after 30+ years of great gaming. YMMV of course.
I can agree with that Sunderstone.
I find that there is less roleplaying going on with pickup groups.
I can always play a mini skirmish game in an hour if I want die hard tactics.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am pretty happy with Pathfinder. It delivers on everything I ask of it. I came to it as a revival of 3.5 after 4e didn't do it for me, and it was one of the best roleplaying-related decisions I've ever made.
Both my group and I are tremendously pleased with the game and grateful for the quality, amount of content, and continous support. In fact, Pathfinder is the first game where every single member of my group (the 7 of us) has gone out and purchased their own core rulebooks. That's how happy we are with it.
Never thought I'd say this... I'm so–so (as in Meh) happy with PF.
As the years go by, I find myself missing the simpler days when the game was more "product ofy our imagination" and less tactical. The main thing at this point stopping me from running games is the constantly stopping to map things (once in awhile is good for the major battles).I do like the cleaned up rules of PFRPG, but the campaign setting is wearing on me with the exception of Varisia, the Riverlands, and the country from the CC ap (I forget the name at this time). I'm more of Greyhawk or Aereth setting type of guy.
Overall, it's the tactical aspect pushing me closer to leaving the hobby behind for good after 30+ years of great gaming. YMMV of course.
Have a look at some of the retroclones they may sate your appetite for a bit. We're using Myth an Magic (2nd ed based d20) but are going to keep playing PF as well.
We use the investigation skills from Lorefinder and houserule the lorefinder skillpoints.
We start in Golarion the kingmaker kampagne and we change the setting to Eberron.
So we use the Eberron-Conversionguide Pathfinder, too.
But yes, i like pathfinder and golarion, but the homebrew is verry nice (for our group).
Der Origami Mann,
Nice to know it's getting some use. The actual thread for the conversion is Tzizimine's Eberron to Pathfinder Conversion, now that the site is ready for stress-testing.
-Dan
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My only problem with pathfinder is that I can only play it once a week.
I absolutely hate that I spend more time on the forums than actually playing.
Runequest is as perfect a system as I've ever seen. Second edition. :pWas that the one they supposedly borrowed a lot from when making 3e? I can't remember, but it was either that or Rolemaster. I've never played either game, this is just something I have heard.Rolemaster. Monte Cook worked on Rolemaster. I was a Rolemaster fan prior to finding Conan OGL which ultimately led me back to D&D 3e and evenutally Pathfinder.
Elves with low-light vision, dwarves with darkvision, the skill system, some of the fluff all were recognizable to me as Rolemaster influences.
I would be playing Rolemaster over Pathfiner if I could find other people who liked the game.
Then just play core, if that is your problem.
|
I like Pathfinder. It started out as the best collection of house rules I'd ever seen for 3.5, and since has grown into its own as a system. I like it because it feels like D&D.
I like 4th edition. I like the tactical, squad level combat simulations. I like the balance and flavor. But, it's not D&D. No matter how hard it tries, the names are the same but the feeling just isn't there.
Long-time gamer here,
I got into D&D just as 2nd Edition was winding down. 3e was a revelation for me. It was awesome. 3.5 made it even better, refining that system. Then 4e was coming, and I enjoyed it, but it was a VERY different game. I also kept an eye on Pathfinder, and as I have gone along, I've found myself turning back to Pathfinder because it evolved out of the games that formed the bulk of my gaming experience, and it is SLICK.
However, I live in an isolated northern community, and there are no gamers up here. I'm getting a play-by-post Pathfinder game set up via Facebook with a few people from my old gaming group in the south. I'm excited for it, but I'm also realizing a lot of the challenges of running pbp games.
Happy with Pathfinder, less happy with my current avenues for gaming.
(Wish there were Kindle versions of the Pathfinder Tales novels... just saying...)
Long-time gamer here,
I got into D&D just as 2nd Edition was winding down. 3e was a revelation for me. It was awesome. 3.5 made it even better, refining that system. Then 4e was coming, and I enjoyed it, but it was a VERY different game. I also kept an eye on Pathfinder, and as I have gone along, I've found myself turning back to Pathfinder because it evolved out of the games that formed the bulk of my gaming experience, and it is SLICK.
However, I live in an isolated northern community, and there are no gamers up here. I'm getting a play-by-post Pathfinder game set up via Facebook with a few people from my old gaming group in the south. I'm excited for it, but I'm also realizing a lot of the challenges of running pbp games.
Happy with Pathfinder, less happy with my current avenues for gaming.
(Wish there were Kindle versions of the Pathfinder Tales novels... just saying...)
If they are not DRM protected try using Calibre to convert them to a format the Kindle will display.
I enjoy Pathfinder more than any game out there, but as stated by others there are issue's with it. The greatest thing about this game is the OGL, for many of the issue's Paizo have not corrected have been re-worked by 3PP one way or the other, thus making the game even better.
I also love the Template's that the 3rd Edition of this great game have, compared to how it was in older Editions. I know they were around from the beginning of 3rd Edition but its a feel good forum so I went with it.
91% happy with it. Custom item creation needs cleanup or a rewrite, and there are a couple of broken things that need errata (beast bonded witch etc). But on the whole, it's the most well thought out system out there.
While i've always preferred 2e pre-spelljammer and palladium as my favorite systems, I can say my current summoner is probably my favorite character I've ever played over the last 30 years. And that wasnt possible in previous system. So that's saying something. I hate the fact the system is written around battlemat mechanics, but thematically I like my summoner enough to put up with it.
Pathfinder has the advantage of being a system that is still published, easy to find compatible content with, and easy to find groups for.
my problems with it are
martial heroes don't feel cinematic enough to me. lack of animesque talents, combat is too static, and it feels more like a game of rockem sockem robots with the aspect that the first successful full attack could spell the difference between victory and defeat.
but then, i am a fan of hardcore elements derived from such things as Anime, Wuxia, Mythology, and Hollywood Movies developed on a more grandiose scale
when i play pathfinder, i don't want to play generic human barbarian #29, i want to play something along the lines of Chu Culain (did i get the spelling right), Lu-Bu, Son-Wukong, Gilgamesh, Achilles, Miyomoto Musashi, Chun-Hyang, Hercules, Wong Fei Hong, or even Beowulf. the problem is, pathfinder supports none of these concepts effectively
Hell, i wouldn't mind playing Karasu, Roronoa Zorro, Reimu Hakurei, Edward Elric, Quicksword Ilina, Deathblow Georg, Lelouch Lamperouge, Alice Margatroid, Enma Ai, or even a fantasy Version of Gokou Ruri whose powers actually worked and were more than a playful Weeaboo tease.
the problem with the system, is the lack of equally viable options, which leads to some of the same generic builds.
Old book, I think it was a 3.0 or 3.5 players handbook that had a variant "TO-HIT" system...
you did your natural to-hit...but you had four armor classes.
You had options how you would respond to incoming attacks so it did bog things down...
But one was a parry roll (you could parry like you could hit, based off iterative attacks)
One was a dodge, which was your reflex save added to a d20
one was a block if you had a shield
the other was just your armor.
and you would add your d20 roll to one of those four choices instead of the static ten which you always have....
Just my two-bits.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is a shame because the game was much better when it was new.
Totally agree with that. I was happy with the Core Rulebook, but I really dislike the direction taken by PRPG in the "Advanced" and "Ultimate" books.
- I wanna play bomberman!
- OK, so you have to play an alchemist, because the devs decided that alchemical weapons can't be quick-drawn, unless you're an alchemist.
- Wait, I can't play bomberman in Core?!
Same for archetypes (which can be combined together for more complexity), additional rules which don't mesh well with the existing ruleset, untested/trap options (30 dice rolls for Weird Words?! Powerful Sneak making you weaker?! Prone shooter doing nothing ?!... WTF?!) and so on.
I am happy with Pathfinder. I enjoy the mechanical complexity of building my character and determining optional magic items, etc., and I enjoy the tactical combat, which I find a nice break between RP encounters.
I visit the boards mostly to improve my system mastery and discuss the various options available in the game and the ways they intersect, particularly regarding character classes I am playing or playing with.
I'm happy with Pathfinder, but even if I play Pathfinder, I still play 3.5, and much of the so-called backwards compatibility just adds too much powercreep in itself, so I tend to avoid meshing up the two.
Pathfinder is cool, new and things, but also has a lot of problems to me.
Right in the core, we got new powers, some of which are scandalous (LOL DIVINER I ALWAYS ACT, AND PERHAPS FIRST) or luckluster (many powers are weak or too situational even if flavourful). I play mostly core, because Advanced Player's Guide already takes the power too far with Dazing Spell, some archetypes, the summoner, the alchemist, or the gunslinger and samurai in Ultimate Combat. Non-core books are full too powerful options and uttercrap, though in general they are very good. I feel like if I got backwards compatibility, the options would render the game too out of hand.
Martials have been improved much, though the fighter got only "more damage" instead of actual class features. In combat, martials rule, as far as I experimented. 10° level though.
The only martial that isn't able to contribuite outside combat is a monk played by a friend of us, that lost interest in rpgs and isn't contributing in roleplaying, perhaps using his acute mind to help the group with problem solving (which he does not).
I feel like many spells were un-necessarily/too much nerfed (meteor swarm? force cage? solid fog?).