| blainedeyoung |
I've been playing D&D since childhood- let's say upwards of 30 years. I just bought the Pathfinder CoreRuleBook a couple of days ago. If you're interested in knowing why I'll tell you, I had heard of Pathfinder before but I thought it was another cheap D&D knockoff.
I discovered its true identity searching forums about Infinity Engine games (Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale). I loved these games when they came out, but 3rd edition D&D ruined me for earlier editions. I had always hated that there is absolutely no game difference between someone with a 9 Str and someone with a 14. And furthermore the difference is trivial unless you have an 18 *and* you're a fighter, but if you have a 19, then it doesn't matter whether or not you're a fighter. But a magic-user with 19 Con has the same HP bonus as a magic-user with a 16.
BGII was where I discovered the real absurdity of the 2E multi-classing system. From 1st level to 9th the fighter/mage is one level behind the fighter, but then at 9th everything changes. The experience point requirement for each level stops doubling, so now the fighter goes up 2 levels for every level the fighter/mage goes up. When the fighter was 10th level the fighter/mage was 9th, but by the time the fighter is 30th level the fighter/mage is just getting to 20th. How utterly asinine?! And the game is riddled with problems like that.
When they came out with the Enhanced Edition of Infinity Engine games, I really tried to get back into them to recapture that part of my youth. But I couldn't because I kept looking at the 2E rules and thinking "It shouldn't be like this!" So recently I got the notion of looking for a mod that changes the games to use the 3E rules. I didn't find it, but I did find several posts where people asked for that mod and were told that they should look into the Pathfinder game because "It's an improved version of the 3.5E rules."
I was one of the four people who actually liked the 4th edition D&D rules. It had some problems, but I think the major complaint people had was simply that it was a radical change and didn't really feel like D&D. Well, it was a radical change that intelligently addressed some of the problems that have haunted the game from the beginning. That attribute absurdity in 2E I was talking about earlier was there as an attempt to balance fighters with mages. They over-corrected and made fighters distinctly more powerful than mages (in a campaign where you can have high attributes), but I understand the failure. It's a difficult thing to do well. In the new D&D rules, it was easy to balance fighters and mages because they took away mages' spells and gave them powers of the exact same number and variety they gave to fighters. The only difference between a fireball making a blast 5 effect and a rogue throwing knives making a blast 5 effect is flavor text- especially if the rogue has some way of making his knives do fire damage.
I've been reading the Pathfinder CoreRuleBook for a couple of days, and I have to agree. It is a better version of the 3.5E rules. The writers are entirely correct the base classes in 3.5 were bland and lacked any real incentive to stay with that class. Monks always had a good reason to stay monks- their class powers keep getting better. But fighters just got more feats, and the feats in the 3E PH weren't worth it. There were a couple of them you really wanted but not enough to keep going 20 levels. And Pathfinder is full of thoughtful, creative, and interesting solutions to problems like that.
But it is still vexed with innumerable little problems. Every version of the sorcerer class I've ever seen was overpowered compared to wizards, and Pathfinder is no exception. I see you've really tried by giving mages extra powers based on their specialty school (and nicely done), but compare those powers with sorcerer bloodline powers. I think sorcerers come out way ahead, as they do with base spellcasting. Wizards are supposed to beat sorcerers' spellcasting abilities with versatility, but they need a lot of spells to do that and the fact that there's strong incentive for them to specialize in one school works counter to that proposition.
And what's up with the Hand of the Apprentice power? It's nice. You give mages, from 1st level, a ranged attack that uses their Int. But it has damage based on Str. Why? They're not throwing the object. The damage should be based on their Int too.
And the whole time I was reading sorcerer and wizard classes I was thinking. Maybe they'll balance this by making wizard a better preparation for the Archmage prestige class. That's the way it was in 3E. But then it turns out there is no Archmage prestige class.
And in this merry war between wizards and sorcerers, I think you've left the other classes totally out in the cold. They don't have powers anything like either of these classes.
I love the way you've simplified the whole turning undead thing. That went from complex in 1st edition to useless in 3rd edition. In Icewind Dale II I give my clerics 3's in their Cha because the turn undead simply isn't worth investing in. In Pathfinder, turn undead has become simple and powerful. But I cannot for the life of me figure out why you left it based on Cha. Do clerics need Cha for anything else? You're forcing them to invest in this attribute just for turn undead. I mean was this done by the same people who decided to base Paladins' spellcasting ability on Cha rather than on Wis? And why do they have to take a feat to use it? Turn undead has been one of the central powers of clerics from the beginning of D&D. Now while sorcerers get bonus feats with almost the frequency of fighters, clerics have to invest a feat to get one of their birthright abilities. Granted, you did make turning powerful and they got channel energy as compensation, but it still only works on undead. And you took away the destroy feature. As much we love watching our enemies flee in terror, there's nothing quite so cool as the cleric raising his holy symbol and his enemies crumble to dust. It helped quicken a lot of tedious low-level encounters too.
Then there's the energy blast thing. In cleric's domains and sorcerer's bloodline abilities, they do a ranged touch attack that deals 1d6 (or even 1d4) + 1/2 their level. What is the point of this power? I mean would you even take the time to record this on a character sheet? At low-level it's just slightly better than their base ranged attack, but by tenth level they're never going to use this. Can you see a 20th level spellcaster taking their turn to make a 1d6+10 energy attack on one target that requires a ranged touch? And they can do it 3 times + prime requisite bonus? They're never going to do it once. I understand it's a minor power, but let them add their whole level to the damage and maybe they'll actually use it.
These are just a few thoughts from a preliminary examination. I hope it sounds like constructive criticism. I want to help make the game better. Furthermore, I may be convinced I was wrong about this or that, and I apologize if I am.
Best regards,
Blaine
| GM 1990 |
I started gaming around 80 as well. Last year my children asked to start a game after they'd been reading through all my 1E books (and 2E PHB/DMG). But after 2 sessions of THAC0 (and finding -so much- on the web about d20 based systems), I bought PF. Well, technically I downloaded the free CRB and Bestiary, started converting the PCs while the books were on order.
I've found it significantly easier to teach the new gamers, even though its more rules and modifier heavy - but THAC0 was just brain hurting, especially if you also used weapon-type vs armor-type to hit mods.
I love most of what's different from 1E, especially the spell casting, skills (I used NWP early on from the WSG and DSG in 1E), and of course the ability to customize your character with feats. All of these things, while adding crunch have also made it easier for my new gamers because right there on the sheet are things they can do/try, while 1E was more free-form, it could be harder for new gamers to really think beyond rolling to hit/damage.
As you've seen the major changes increase playability of casters. In fact, most of what you'll see on the forums are recommendations for how to catch martials (mostly the core fighter) back up to casters in their ability to interact mechanically during out of combat. I've found this less problematic at my game, but I also don't require skill checks as often, opting more for story/RP. That being said, I can see the mechanical points, and for organized play, if you don't have high enough modifier to pass the skill DC, your fighter just isn't going to be able to help out on some things (or will have to spend too much $$ on devices to stay caught up).
Regarding casters. I really like the majority of it. Cantrips are a nice way for casters to use magic "all day" or in place of their crossbow for combat. The schools, etc allow for customization as well. Like 1E at high levels magic can just dominate the game though, and wizard/sorc have more survivability now than they did in 1E as well.
If you check out the electronic PRD (linked over in left-hand column of this site near the top) you'll find -a lot- of archtypes, etc in the products that came out since the PRD. As well as the PF Unchained versions of rogue, monk, barbarian, summoner.
Like any system, you're seeing that out of the box there are things for your tastes and style that you're going to want to houserule/modify. One nice thing about the forums is there are already -a lot- of options out there, or you can ask for specifics ideas (or feedback on your houserule) and will get some good info back. Alas, since its the internet, you will also from time to time get less productive feedback, or someone will derail your thread into a spiral of useless arguing.
Good luck!
PS. the electronic rules and supplements are also available for mobile devices.
Google Apps: Pathfinder Masterwork Tools; Pathfinder RPG