Pathfinder 1E Disenchanted with Pathfinder

[DaveMage]

I think what I am looking for is someone to explain to me why I'm wrong, because I feel a little jaded after the whole experience. The Pathfinder book is really pretty and I want a reason to add it to my collection, but I just can't seem to find a good one.

Nothing wrong with this at all!

I love most of the changes in Pathfinder, but not all.

Some things they changed were not necessary, IMO. I am also pretty sure that my philosophy on epic level play will not match theirs when they finally release their epic rules.

I also don't like that many of the WotC IP standards (beholders, some demon lords, some devil lords, mind flayers, slaadi) are not present. I don't like Asmodeus as a god - I'd rather he be like he was in 3E and 1E (a monster to be a BBEG for the PCs).

However, I do think the positives outweigh the negatives by far and have enjoyed Paizo's take on many things. Perfectly fine if you don't think the positives outweight the negatives and stay 3.5.

I'd play in either ruleset quite happily.

 

[Sigurd]

Sounds to me like you're just burned out on 3.x. Pathfinder has refined some of the 3.X OGL framework but its still OGL D&D.

Get outdoors for a while. Play a radically different game. Play a boardgame. Go clean sewers for fun .


I wouldn't over think it because there are no game police out there recording your loyalty change or waiting to ....


Mostly players keep me in one game system or another. I like 3.x and I think pathfinder is the best 3.x. It's not quantified or rational. My advice would be don't worry or make decisions. Do something else for a while.


Sigurd

 

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

Get outdoors for a while. Play a radically different game. Play a boardgame. Go clean sewers for fun .

Echoing Sigurd here a bit (well not the cleaning sewers part). We'd been playing 3.5 / 4E for several years straight. After the last 4E game ended, we decided to play Mage for a while, its been a total breath of fresh air. Can't recommend trying something different every so often enough

 

[MortonStromgal]

Maybe I am off-base because it seems a lot of people are enjoying Pathfinder, and I'm happy for them. But I don't think it is the game for me.

Your not off-base, thats why there are 1001 systems that are not D&D out there. Read some reviews find one that works for you and then sell your group on it! D&D became the 800lbs gorilla because people sold their friends on it.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

Good post

I agree with you about the Paizo people being best at stories. And it's true that Pathfinder isn't a revolution in game system design or anything. But, I didn't want one in the first place.

Pathfinder is really about enabling people who didn't want to switch to 4E to maintain the status quo -- it's an in-print rules set. I do think it has a lot of good fixes, but they are small fixes. I am pretty sure that you can take any Pathfinder adventure and run it using 3.5 rules and not have any problems.

What I like about Pathfinder is its exceptional production quality, the fact that they managed to fix about twice as many small problems with 3.5 as they introduced, and that it's tied to a setting and a series of adventures that are second to none. It doesn't hurt that the people who run the company are gamers, up to and including the CEO, either. They're people that I _want_ to do business with.

Ken

 

[fireinthedust]

I've got a shelf of different systems. I like them for different reasons.


My question to you: ignoring what you *don't* like.... What are you looking for?

Let's face it: you want something PF isn't giving you for some reason. What is that? Why do you have to bring forward what you don't like about this particular system to these particular people, when you have yet to illustrate what you want to see.

I do see that you like 3.x. Okay, good. What else? There's your opinion, which I've shared at times, and not at others. I'm a fan of 4e, M&M, nWoD, MCWoD, Dragon Age by GR, True20, d20 Modern, SAGA edition, BESM, and I've even come up with my own that looks like it might work. They all suit me in different ways.

So what are you hoping to achieve? Simulation? that's 3e. A Combat mechanic? That's 4e. Spy vs. Spy? Spycraft, I guess. Powerful beings duking it out? Mutants & Masterminds.

Sure, PF is what it is. Fine. So how can we help? We're friendly people.

Also: before you take my meaning as hostile, it's not. I'm just curious, and I hope this helps.

 

[slwoyach]

I was also looking forward to Pathfinder, but I also find myself disappointed. They seemed to try to balance out the classes by powering them up. But they powered up all the classes, not just the weak ones. It's still semi-compatible (though not as much as they claimed, due to the power-up) but I think Pathfinder will be regulated to the occasional nugget being added to my 3.5 game. I even find myself looking back towards 2e lately, I hate the flash-bang that creeped into 3e+.

 

[pawsplay]

I like the revised skills, combat maneuvers, fixes on various spells, etc. That's basically what sold me, the 3.75 aspect. In terms of changes, I was not eager for changes, but I converted from 3.0 to 3.5 so I was not averse to converting again. There's a little more wahoo in Pathfinder than I like, something that troubled me about the later 3e books but which a lot of people apparently liked, but I realized by and by that it doesn't have to intrude very much. A wacky sorcerer bloodline here or there is not going to substantially change the feel of my campaign, and I can address a lot of other elements (glitterpunk gnomes?) through campaign design and leave the rules as they are.

So basically, I adopted Pathfinder because of the core rules changes and because as a worldbuilder and occasional freelancer, I want to be plugged into something in print. If you don't feel the rules changes are enough, and you just can't find the enthusiasm to learn a few class changes to barbarian and rogue and so forth, I can understand why Pf would be underwhelming.

 

[korel]

Personally what sold me on Pathfinder is one little thing.....They replaced LA with CR. This makes it so much easier to play monsters, which is all I play these days.

I've been playing since 3.0 was first released and absolutely fell in love with the imp. In pathfinder an Imp is CR/ECL 2 not supposedly 8.

 

[Sigurd]

Personally what sold me on Pathfinder is one little thing.....They replaced LA with CR. This makes it so much easier to play monsters, which is all I play these days.

I've been playing since 3.0 was first released and absolutely fell in love with the imp. In pathfinder an Imp is CR/ECL 2 not supposedly 8.

Strictly speaking that's not what they did. They rejected the LA system but they haven't really replaced it with anything. I'm glad you and your DM are rolling with the stats you have but as Paizo has said they don't really have a system for Monster Characters in place. Officially the bestiary etc.. have no approved player character monsters.

Sigurd