E6 is too powerful. How about E1.


Homebrew and House Rules

101 to 150 of 221 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
Whale_Cancer wrote:

Wow, DrDeth, you really are on a crusade.

Tell me on this character sheet where the DM hurt you.

Here's my issue: at one time I was a dev, thus I respect their hard work and creative process. E6 is basically telling the dev they don't know what they are doing, that some lone DM knows better how to balance a game than the pros... And they don't.

I got nothing against low magic or low powered games, in fact we had a blast playing Iron Heroes. I resect those Devs too, for their hard work and creativity.

PF is a beautifully designed square peg. I hate to see bad DM trying to hammer it into a round hole...and doing so badly.

Want a skill based game? There are dozens. A low magic? Likewise. Respect those Devs by buying and using their products. Respect the Paizo people by playing the game at least somewhat how it was designed.

Yes, PF is *THE* hot games system now and if course your players are clamoring to play it. Just be honest with them. Tell them you can't or won't and suggest a real low magic systems rather than trying to bastardize Pathfinder.

Respect. Honesty.

Even if I were to accept your basic argument - which I don't - E6 does extremely little to change the intrinsic 'balance' (lol) of the game. It just limits the action to a desirable subsection of levels.

Also, with your thinking, DMs should refrain from writing their own adventures; they should only run those published by those on high. Nonsense.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tom S 820 wrote:
First Basic Pathfinder box now E6. Can we Dum down role playing any game more. Let make this hobby that any one can do. So it not just smart folks any more.

I've got some tough news for you. It's never been only smart folk.

Some of them can't even spell "dumb". :P


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tom S 820 wrote:
First Basic Pathfinder box now E6. Can we Dum down role playing any game more. Let make this hobby that any one can do. So it not just smart folks any more.

Pssst:

E6 was first publicized in 2007, before Pathfinder. And definitely before the pathfinder beginners box. And E6 had been used by many people long before then. If you are gonna talk about "duming" down RPGs, at least get your chronology right:)

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
Whale_Cancer wrote:

Wow, DrDeth, you really are on a crusade.

Tell me on this character sheet where the DM hurt you.

Here's my issue: at one time I was a dev, thus I respect their hard work and creative process. E6 is basically telling the dev they don't know what they are doing, that some lone DM knows better how to balance a game than the pros... And they don't.

I got nothing against low magic or low powered games, in fact we had a blast playing Iron Heroes. I resect those Devs too, for their hard work and creativity.

PF is a beautifully designed square peg. I hate to see bad DM trying to hammer it into a round hole...and doing so badly.

Want a skill based game? There are dozens. A low magic? Likewise. Respect those Devs by buying and using their products. Respect the Paizo people by playing the game at least somewhat how it was designed.

Yes, PF is *THE* hot games system now and if course your players are clamoring to play it. Just be honest with them. Tell them you can't or won't and suggest a real low magic systems rather than trying to bastardize Pathfinder.

Respect. Honesty.

Yet you disrespect the desire for DMs to take a more involved roll in their game and maybe cut their teeth on doing some DevLite stuff. Some of us want and like Pathfinder's rules and want what is essentially a houseruled game of Pathfinder that sticks to lower level play. I don't want Iron Heroes, Castles and Crusades, or any of the myriad of games like that. I like Pathfinder. I can find Pathfinder players who want to play an E6 style of game easier than I can find a group of any of the other games out there.

Stop crucifying people for wanting to do their own "Dev" on an existing product that has, through it's many incarnations from D&D basic on, been a game that is houseruled to be the game you want it to be just because you want only Real Developers to get respect for making up games. I can develop also, where's my respect? Apparently hypocrites don't have any for me.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If everyone simply cowtails to what the current batch of developers puts out, and nobody does their own thing, then the industry dies when they all die out.

Probably well before, since it would be stagnant as hell.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Orthos wrote:


And heck, you can still toss Mythic onto it (at least theoretically) and have E6/7/8 characters taking on mid-teens CR challenges.

Funny you should mention Mythic - I am doing almost exactly that for my homebrew campaign: E12 with up to 6 Mythic Tiers.

I've gone into the reasons elsewhere, but level 6-12 is the "sweet spot" for me, both as a player and as a GM. Traditionally, campaigns peter out around level 12 or 13 as that's where the characters want to settle down and run temples/guilds/small countries (several of them are still around as NPCs).

12th level is also the point where the progressions converge - your BAB goes up whatever progression you're on, Good Saves hit 8, Poor Saves hit 4, and you get your 3rd ability increase. This was even more true in 3.X where you got feats at every third level instead of every odd level. If you didn't know better, you could look at the charts and think they were *MEANT* to run out of 12 the way everything progresses in multiples of 2, 3, or 4.

Capping class advancement at 12 but allowing mythic tiers means that I can still use most if not all of the Bestiary Monsters without excessive tweaking. There is a theoretical maximum of 224 HP without magic (assuming a pure Barbarian with 22 CON, Toughness, and a loaded d12) which is manageable - in reality most PCs will struggle to get into triple figures. You also qualify for most feats by then - which is even more important in E(X).

Besides, Antimagic Field/Raise Dead/Teleport/Polymorph is about as high magic as I like to go - if you want a Wish, go out and convince a Genie to grant it to you...

***

Which is great for my game in my setting with my players.

Other groups may prefer E6, or E8, or the full 20 level progression - or indeed E1, which definitely sounds like an interesting way of converting D20 to a skill based system for those who feel so inclined.

One of the things I love about Pathfinder/D20 is that it is so adaptable, and you can use it as a toolkit to play in all these styles if you wish. Embrace the diversity people!


6 people marked this as a favorite.

I think it's safe to say that every "dev" alive today started as a house rule writer.


Not sure if I'd allow even E1... maybe after about 20 years of RW game play I'd let my players advance that far. 1st level is just so... epic.

I mean, c'mon... how many of us can get hit by a sword over and over again? I say everyone should start out a zero-level commoner and have to work (most of their lives) toward level one.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:

If everyone simply cowtails to what the current batch of developers puts out, and nobody does their own thing, then the industry dies when they all die out.

Probably well before, since it would be stagnant as hell.

^ This, because of:

Mythic Evil Lincoln wrote:


I think it's safe to say that every "dev" alive today started as a house rule writer.

^ This.

Part of the beauty of the OGL is it promotes just this kind of thing. Otherwise we'd all be here right now saying how Pathfinder is an insult to the developers of 3.5E, which itself is an insult to the developers of 3E... which, dammit, was an insult to the developers that put THAC0 in the game. Then again replacing THAC0 was a good thing all things considered, however nostalgic it may feel to talk about it ;)

So someone builds a game variant that only uses a small part of Pathfinder material and then goes off in it's own direction. Personally I encourage more people to do this kind of thing.

Sure, we'll get a mix of good, bad and utterly horrible material out of it, but then again the d20 licence did the same thing, yet I still think d20/OGL was one of the best things ever to happen to the hobby. I have no problem being flooded with materials of differing quality, as I enjoy sorting and filtering through it to find the things I want to use. More importantly, what looks like a terrible idea to me could well be exactly what another person wants in their game.

Now, I personally don't think I'd enjoy E-anything, and would much rather add *more* character levels. Just because I want this certainly doesn't mean I think everyone else should too, and more importantly it means a pretty good chance that someone else has come up with ideas I *do* want to use in my game. I'm certainly not going to tell anyone they're playing *their* game wrong. They bought the game, it's their right to do whatever they want in order that they can enjoy playing whatever game they end up playing, just as it was my right thirty-three years ago to shove my Cluedo (Clue to those of you in the US) board up against my Monopoly board and make up a hybrid game out of it (despite it being a really terrible hybrid game...)

If someone out there wants to use a single page of anything I've ever written, and ignore all the rest, then I'd would never take that as some kind of personal slight on my ability. I'd be happy they found something in that single page that they like enough to want to use.


DMs generally find it easier to ban entire books or say "Core Only" or "Core+APG Only" than to rule against some specific class, spell, or ability. I suspect that E* is largely an outgrowth of that. I'd personally rather just see overpowered game elements get nerfed so that they're less problematic, but that's a big and complex effort requiring rulings against specific powers, each of which is likely to be vigorously defended. Just trying to convince folks on the message boards that literally any power no matter how crazy is overpowered practically requires divine intervention (or at least "design" intervention)

Anyhow, I don't think the urge to play E* needs to be about DM craving "control" so much as just a break from the overpowered rigors of high level play. Having encountered various game balance issues in my current 16th level game as well as a few creeping into a 10th level game which went on hiatus I can definitely understand the urge to go E*.

@DrDeth - I'm just a dedicated hobbyist rather than a professional game designer. RPG game design seems like it might be a fun job, but I've got a job already. That said, I have a lot of gaming experience and feel like a reasonably smart person. I don't see any reason to cower in awe of professionals or assume that their opinion is naturally superior to my own. Gary Gygax was a dedicated hobbyist before creating D&D. I think the dedicated hobbyist is the backbone of the hobby. In fact I guess that's pretty obvious.


Rod Millard wrote:


I've gone into the reasons elsewhere, but level 6-12 is the "sweet spot" for me, both as a player and as a GM. Traditionally, campaigns peter out around level 12 or 13 as that's where the characters want to settle down and run temples/guilds/small countries (several of them are still around as NPCs).

12th level is also the point where the progressions converge - your BAB goes up whatever progression you're on, Good Saves hit 8, Poor Saves hit 4, and you get your 3rd ability increase. This was even more true in 3.X where you got feats at every third level instead of every odd level. If you didn't know better, you could look at the charts and think they were *MEANT* to run out of 12 the way everything progresses in multiples of 2, 3, or 4. .

I mostly agree. I find 5-12 to be the "sweet spot". This is why E6 annoys me, it cuts out the best part of the game. It's like being served a T-bone steak, but they have removed the meat, leaving only the fat & bone part. (The gristle is the very high level part, where I admit things start to break down a little. I agree, once PC's can cast "wish" the game changes a lot.)

E12? Well, I'd hate to call it that, but having a campaign that would end as we get to level 13 would not be in any way an issue to me.


For the record I co-DM a campaign with 6 players (ranging from 1 new player, several moderately experienced players, 2 players who have a strong understanding of the system, 1 DM who is very experienced and me, who is a moderately experienced player/DM).

Most of the players have been playing since 3rd D&D edition, with a few of us playing since 1E (intermittently).

We started with vanilla Pathfinder and wound up our campaign last year at around 15th level (from memory).

So, then we decided to play RotRL anniversary and my co-DM suggested E6 rules. I was very hesitant about the whole thing, for fear of breaking the system, but we agreed to let the players choose.

ALL 6 players said they were keen to try it.

We didn't pressure or coerce them - just stated what it would entail and they all voted in favour of E6.

I gotta give some credit to my players - they are not mindless idiots who need to be told what to do. In fact several of the players understand the mechanics way better that I do (although my co-DM has a very good understanding too).

We aim for a co-operative game where everyone can have fun and letting the players direct part of how they want the game run is part of that.

Oh - and for the record (again) we have no problems running high level games, in terms of the mechanics/concepts. The last campaign wrapped up, with a over-the-top set piece battle involving epic level characters (level 60...completely broken, mind you) battling gods and demons. High level play is not scary, just 'bloated' (that's the best word I could come up with. Just complex and time consuming, but not any more difficult).

Not saying E6 is superior or the 'best' system, but it might be the best system for our group of players.


I have never Gm'd an e(x), count me as someone who wants to try it as a player however.

101 to 150 of 221 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / E6 is too powerful. How about E1. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.