General RPG Rules DiscussionDiscuss the rules of any game except D&D or Pathfinder, such as Arcana Evolved, Mutants & Masterminds, Star Wars Saga, d20 Modern, and the like.
Pathfinder, above all else, is meant to be compatable with D&D 3.x and the SRD (and the multitude of products based on it). Creating an entirely different spellcasting system, whatever its merits, would pretty much derail that goal.
So I've been thinking...
Its obvious that Pathfinder has one major design goal: keep the 3.x edition rules in print and allow them (and others) to continue making 3.x compatible material with a "core book" still in print. But as we all know, Pathfinder has used the opportunity to "fix" some of the problems people have had with 3e.
The question is; what were the design goals of those changes?
The question is twofold. First, what problems does Pathfinder address (which gets into what nagging problems in 3.5 was there) and how does it address them (that is, what doe it do to fix them.) Granted, we don't have the final rules to answer that, but generalities and assumptions based on beta and blog-posts might be sufficient for now.
For example, some people have complained about high-level math breaking down, creating areas where only characters with "good" babs or saves can make the AC/DC and everyone else might as well not bother. Is Pathfinder fixing that problem? How so?
People familiar with the system (designers especially), what problems is Pathfinder attempting to fix and how?
For example, some people have complained about high-level math breaking down, creating areas where only characters with "good" babs or saves can make the AC/DC and everyone else might as well not bother. Is Pathfinder fixing that problem? How so?
I'm under the impression that Pathfinder is powering up PC classes in part for this reason: that a class with more HP and better saves and AC will make the game a little less binary at high levels.
Ultimately, the problem is just one of numbers: if the monster's AC is so high that only the truly dedicated can hit them, you can either have a different formula for monster AC (which might mess with that npc/pc transparency) or you can have classes give PC's slightly more power so that you don't have to quite be as dedicated to hit that AC (but you still probably won't hit it with a wizard).
I could be wrong on that, but that's what I see.
Honestly, some transparency on these things would be pretty useful to me, as I don't really know what specific 3e problems Pathfinder wants to fix, and which it is leaving alone as not really big problems. I know low-level staying power is one of those things (and Pathfinder classes have more low-level staying power in the form of more starting HP), but I don't know much about many of the others....
The primary design goal is and remains "get the core rules of the game back in print so we at Paizo can continue to produce supplements and adventures for it." Not only does having a game without an in-print rulebook make it difficult for new players to get into the game, but it makes it VERY difficult to get distributors and stores to stock your products. If we hadn't done the PFRPG, we would have basically lost our shelf space in stores for our products, and that's not good.
We couldn't just reprint the SRD though, since that would have meant a game with no rules for generating ability scores and no rules for advancing characters in level.
At the same time, there's a lot of areas in 3.5 that, over the past several years, players and designers have come to see as awkward. Of course, what person A sees as awkward isn't necessarily what person B sees as awkward, but in designing the PFRPG, we drew upon Paizo's years of experience with the game and the years of experience of about 50,000 playtesters, and it became apparent what parts of the game were causing the most problems.
Since the actual game isn't out yet, and since we're still in the preview stages to ramp up excitement for it, I can't really go all transparent on the rules yet but once the game is out, myself, Jason, and Erik will likely be all over the internet talking about the game and answering questions.
One thing I can talk about real quick though is the reason behind the "power increase." It's mostly because at 1st level, we felt that PCs were too fragile. By increasing the power of the core races a bit, increasing HD for several classes, and overall addressing the baseline power, low level characters have a better chance to survive. We didn't want to go TOO far, though; playing low-level characters who don't feel too far removed from comonfolk is a popular part of the game, and it allows for a more satisfactory feeling of rising power when you become high level but remember the days where a couple of goblins were scary stuff.
Also, we wanted to make it an attractive option to stick with a single class all the way to 20th level, so that meant adding powers to a lot of "dead levels." The end result is that the previous overlords of power in the game (clerics and druids) may have decreased in power slightly, while the other classes increased (in power AND in options) to be more competitive. Of course... "power level" for a class like a fighter (who's job is to fight) and a bard (who's job is to bolster allies and vex foes with enchantments and illusions) and a rogue (who's job is to be fast and sneaky and elegant in combat) means different things...
Anyway... I hope this cleared up a few things, but I'm afraid it won't clear up everything because, again, there's not a LOT we can talk about until the game releases in August.
But, if you loved 3.5, chances are good you'll love PFRPG. If you hated 3.5, there's a good chance that what you hated about 3.5 will still be there in PFRPG, but maybe not.
At the same time, there's a lot of areas in 3.5 that, over the past several years, players and designers have come to see as awkward. Of course, what person A sees as awkward isn't necessarily what person B sees as awkward, but in designing the PFRPG, we drew upon Paizo's years of experience with the game and the years of experience of about 50,000 playtesters, and it became apparent what parts of the game were causing the most problems.
That's truly an amazing number. Is it based on the number of downloads of the beta versions, on polls or sign-ups on your board, or something else?
Good luck with PFRPG
__________________
355 hours played
Gnoguh, human fighter/cleric (kensei->adamantine soldier)
Carric, elf cleric/ranger (radiant servant->saint)
Torn, tiefling wizard/cleric (divine oracle->sages of ages)
Truxas, human feylock/bard (feytouched->feyliege)
Tagron, human rogue (daggermaster->deadly trickster) 21th level Musings of an Epic Virgin
That's truly an amazing number. Is it based on the number of downloads of the beta versions, on polls or sign-ups on your board, or something else?
Good luck with PFRPG
I believe the number is based on the unique downloads per account of the beta rules from Paizo.com. The number's probably higher, actually, since we have no way to tabulate versions of the rules folks got from other sources (such as photocopies or printouts given them by their GMs). It's certainly WAY higher than we'd expected the playtest numbers to be before we went public with the Alpha rules, and it's a pretty encouraging number.
I believe the number is based on the unique downloads per account of the beta rules from Paizo.com. The number's probably higher, actually, since we have no way to tabulate versions of the rules folks got from other sources (such as photocopies or printouts given them by their GMs). It's certainly WAY higher than we'd expected the playtest numbers to be before we went public with the Alpha rules, and it's a pretty encouraging number.
I agree the numbers are encouraging....
But I am an example of one that downloaded the rules and skimmed them once. I hope that I am not considered a playtester by your definition.
And each of the other 5 guys at my game table are just like me. DL'ed, skimmed, never really looked at it again.
I am waiting for the final rules to come out and I might buy it because I am getting rid of many of my 3.x books (for space), but I wasn't a playtester just because I downloaded it.
__________________ Game on, gang! Ptolus #16 (with customized, personalized sig from Monte. Awesomesauce.), Rappan Athuk Reloaded #37 (Another Awesomesauce, the Necromancer way.)
Try to not let failure to use technical language properly get in the way of getting to the real point under discussion. - Umbran
Characters & Games
Books currently in play: Dungeon & Dragon Magazine (*Scales of War AP*), WOTC 4e Core and Supplemental books
Current Campaign: Scales of War - Lost Mines of Karak -- Kodirgo, Minotaur Barbarian 6; Vondal, Dwarf Cleric 6; Karithul, Gnome Bard 6; Marshaun, Elf Druid 6
but I wasn't a playtester just because I downloaded it.
I'm willing to be, if I get my name in the book!
/M
__________________ iAltdorf. An interactive map of the capital of the Empire in WFRP! Download today! Can be used in any fantasy campaign!
http://altdorfer.blogspot.com - Check out the Altdorf Correspondent! A WFRP blog about life in the Imperial capital.
"All editions of D&D are awesome." - Fifth Element (EN World Forums, 2008)
”The tendency to confuse personal taste with objective quality is nearly universal.” - Robin D. Laws – Robin’s Laws of Good Gamemastering (Steve Jackson Games, 2002)
But, if you loved 3.5, chances are good you'll love PFRPG. If you hated 3.5, there's a good chance that what you hated about 3.5 will still be there in PFRPG, but maybe not.
This quote is the most telling I've seen. Thanks for your reply.
There has been some hyperbole on these (and other boards) that wistfully call Pathfinder "3.75", "the real 4th edition" or similar touts (not from Paizo staff, just some ardent enthusiasts). Now I know its mostly a reprint with some well-thought out house rules applied and some added depth at lower-levels. While I'm both happy to see Pathfinder remains close to its roots (for compatibility sake), I'm also dismayed to hear that many of my chief complaints will most likely still be there (even if in diminished form).
As I always intended, I will examine (and more likely purchase) the rules in August, but its nice to know I should expect miracle fixes for some of my major complaints.
(Without deriding the thread into a "3e does/doesn't do that" thread, my chief complaints are: Magic always trumps mundane skill, Big Six magic, CoDzilla, high level math, stacking bonuses, 15-min workdays, large monster stat-blocks & SLAs, and CR/EL balancing nightmares).
I believe the number is based on the unique downloads per account of the beta rules from Paizo.com. The number's probably higher, actually, since we have no way to tabulate versions of the rules folks got from other sources (such as photocopies or printouts given them by their GMs). It's certainly WAY higher than we'd expected the playtest numbers to be before we went public with the Alpha rules, and it's a pretty encouraging number.
Thanks for clarifying.
Cheers
__________________
355 hours played
Gnoguh, human fighter/cleric (kensei->adamantine soldier)
Carric, elf cleric/ranger (radiant servant->saint)
Torn, tiefling wizard/cleric (divine oracle->sages of ages)
Truxas, human feylock/bard (feytouched->feyliege)
Tagron, human rogue (daggermaster->deadly trickster) 21th level Musings of an Epic Virgin
But I am an example of one that downloaded the rules and skimmed them once. I hope that I am not considered a playtester by your definition.
And each of the other 5 guys at my game table are just like me. DL'ed, skimmed, never really looked at it again.
I am waiting for the final rules to come out and I might buy it because I am getting rid of many of my 3.x books (for space), but I wasn't a playtester just because I downloaded it.
Your experience may well be offset by any single GM who downloaded the rules and implemented some or all of them with his group of three or more players. That would require only one out of five DLers to be using the rules in-game to achieve a similar number of those "playtesting."
But I am an example of one that downloaded the rules and skimmed them once. I hope that I am not considered a playtester by your definition.
And each of the other 5 guys at my game table are just like me. DL'ed, skimmed, never really looked at it again.
I am waiting for the final rules to come out and I might buy it because I am getting rid of many of my 3.x books (for space), but I wasn't a playtester just because I downloaded it.
Technically, you are counted as a playtester. If the guys at your table also each downloaded the rules, they also count. That's why we can't really be sure how many actual playtesters we had... but we DID have an awful lot of feedback, in any event!
And on one level, the fact that you were interested enough to look at the Beta (and thus might buy the final books) is in and of itself encouraging from our sales viewpoint, of course! :P
then there are people like me, who have absolutely no intention of ever playing Pathfinder, but will buy the rules just see what you do decide to do with them!
Plus I will be keeping the Beta rules set, because there are cool ideas in there too!
Now when you do decide to do a "fixed" version of 3E, that one I will not only buy, but play, to see if I agree with your designers. Hopefully I will agree.
__________________ It is the spirit of the game, not the letter of the rules, which is important. NEVER hold to the letter written, nor allow some barracks room lawyer to force quotations from the rule book upon you, IF it goes against the obvious intent of the game. As you hew the line with respect to conformity to major systems and uniformity of play in general, also be certain the game is mastered by you and not by your players. Within the broad parameters give in the Advanced Dungeons and Dragons Volumes, YOU are creator and final arbiter. By ordering things as they should be, the game as a WHOLE first, your CAMPAIGN next, and your participants thereafter, you will be playing Advanced Dungeons and Dragons as it was meant to be. May you find as much pleasure in so doing as the rest of us do.
Your experience may well be offset by any single GM who downloaded the rules and implemented some or all of them with his group of three or more players. That would require only one out of five DLers to be using the rules in-game to achieve a similar number of those "playtesting."
That would be the case in our group (6 people). We've been playtesting the Alpha (and then beta) rules. I was the only person to download the rules so that would be one download for 6 playtesters.
Plus I will be keeping the Beta rules set, because there are cool ideas in there too!
Our group has grown quite attached to the Beta rules. I'm not sure what we'll do with the final rules where some things have been pulled back closer to 3.5. We'll cross that bridge when we come to it! In any event, I plan to buy 2 copies of the final rules for the gaming table.
I believe the number is based on the unique downloads per account of the beta rules from Paizo.com.
5 playtesters here, with one download and account used (mine; I was the DM). I gave some feedback here and there. Maybe some of it was useful in some way. *shrug*
Anyway, yeah. The number could be a lot higher. Dunno.
Our group has grown quite attached to the Beta rules. I'm not sure what we'll do with the final rules where some things have been pulled back closer to 3.5. We'll cross that bridge when we come to it! In any event, I plan to buy 2 copies of the final rules for the gaming table.
Yea, me too! I have been downloading the web pages from the Pathfinder OGC wiki and will be creating a local copy, just in case there are things in the final rules where I would prefer the beta rules.
8 people have seen my download( 5 that play in my group) and my printed copy looks well used as it got passed around the whole group as we have been playing with it pretty much since the alpha 1. And yo have sold at lest 2 copes of the finished Book at the very lest
__________________ Remember kids whisky will not put out flaming mages ,but it will confuse the deathknight
"The Soul of D&D? It's rolling a natural 20 when you're down to 3 hit points and the cleric's on the floor and you're staring that sunnavabitch bugbear right in his bloodshot eye and holding the line just long enough to let the wizard unleash a fireball at the guards who are on their way, because they're all that stands between you, the Foozle and Glory." - WizarDru
Thank you Gary Gygax, for everything.
"Rock on, Paizo, for you rock mightily".- dragonlordofpoondari
I participate in two separate gaming groups and as far as I can tell I'm the only one who has downloaded the rules, but after having them printed and bound and passing them around 8 of my players have placed preorders for the finished product with a 9th going with me to GenCon to hopefully pick up a copy there.
Downloaded the beta. Thought it was cool, but went with 4e in the end for the current game. One thing that has resulted though is that I started noticing the Pathfinder: Chronicles products at the local store. I never would have picked them up had I not heard of pathfinder online and checked out the beta. What I found in them was some awesome stuff that is worth having regardless of the system used.
I'm sure I'll play Pathfinder some time in the future. One of the player's in my group loves 3.x and I'm sure when he gets jazzed enough to run a game, it'll be with Pathfinder.
__________________ Matt
I just found out anemones is not spelled anenomes.
Our group has grown quite attached to the Beta rules. I'm not sure what we'll do with the final rules where some things have been pulled back closer to 3.5. We'll cross that bridge when we come to it! In any event, I plan to buy 2 copies of the final rules for the gaming table.
I have run every edition after 1st edition as a hybrid. My 2nd edition game was a 1st edition hybrid. My 3rd edition was a hybrid with those two editions (keeping things like racial restrictions on classes, converting some old spells, etc.).
I will most likely treat the new Pathfinder the same... keeping the racial restrictions from 1st edition (though modified because through player in game action Dwarves can now be paladins), and if I feel Beta did something better I will replace it in the final Pathfinder.
That was part of my problem with 4e. People I have discussed this with in the gamestore agree with me, but there might be debate here: I can't hybrid 4e well with older editions. Or maybe I can but the work involved is just over the threshold.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
