Pathfinder 1E Paizo re-invents Hexcrawling

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

Just ordered this adventure based on the strength of comments in this post.

 

[S'mon]

In connection with my order of Kingmaker 1, I just took a look at the Pathfinder free SRD. Nice clear presentation, nice art, but it seems to retain many of the things I don't much like about 3e, most notably the reducing-bonus iterative attacks and the frustrating 'no movement with a full attack' rule which keep Fighter types both static and ineffective. Fighter's improved save vs Fear is something, but the weak saves issue from 3e seems retained also. I liked the nerfing of Shapechange type spells but overall I didn't see enough to attract me over from 4e.

 

[Steel_Wind]

Wow. Very cool!

This is most definitely a new take on the AP design. I have a few APs I have not run yet, (and I've switched to a home brewed Star Wars:SE -- The Old Republic campaign right now anyways)... but this is very cool.

To Erik and James: this AP design is something I will definitely buy and hope to run some day.

To the OP: Awesome post. Paizo should send you something as it definitely earned them a sale!

Whoops. I spoke too soon. Looks like I am definitely NOT buying Kingmaker... but for all the right reasons.

I told the other DM in my gaming circle about it and he's hot and heavy to get it and run it. Seeing as I would rather play in something like this than run it - it's all good.

Still a sale - just not my money! (Hmm... when you put it that way, that's about as good as it gets, from my perspective )

 

[garyh]

Alright, I've gone and subscribed to Kingmaker. It just looks too cool to pass up, and several of my players thought it sounded fun, too. Looking forward to the first adventure!

 

[Erik Mona]

In connection with my order of Kingmaker 1, I just took a look at the Pathfinder free SRD. Nice clear presentation, nice art, but it seems to retain many of the things I don't much like about 3e, most notably the reducing-bonus iterative attacks and the frustrating 'no movement with a full attack' rule which keep Fighter types both static and ineffective. Fighter's improved save vs Fear is something, but the weak saves issue from 3e seems retained also. I liked the nerfing of Shapechange type spells but overall I didn't see enough to attract me over from 4e.

I don't like iterative attacks much either, but we decided to keep them in large part to maintain backward compatibility with 3.5.

The Vital Strike feat is a good way to lay out more damage even after a move.

Thanks for giving the rules a look!

--Erik

 

[Storminator]

I don't like iterative attacks much either, but we decided to keep them in large part to maintain backward compatibility with 3.5.

The Vital Strike feat is a good way to lay out more damage even after a move.

Thanks for giving the rules a look!

--Erik

There's too much I don't like about 3.5 to play Pathfinder, but I really like that you guys always have reasons for the decisions you've made. I don't think I've seen an issue like this come up and seen your response be "huh, we never thought about that."

PS

 

[BryonD]

most notably the reducing-bonus iterative attacks

brief de-rail: Trailblazer features an alternative system without reducing bonuses that I have substituted into my PF game. Worth a look if that is a key issue for you.

 

[Papa-DRB]

For the Iterative Attack thing, and other niceties, look at Trailblazer by Bad Axe games for "fixes".

New iterative attack:
Bab +6, 2 at -2
Bab +11, 2 at -1
Bab + 16, 2 at 0 (ie. highest)

-- david
Papa.DRB

In connection with my order of Kingmaker 1, I just took a look at the Pathfinder free SRD. Nice clear presentation, nice art, but it seems to retain many of the things I don't much like about 3e, most notably the reducing-bonus iterative attacks and the frustrating 'no movement with a full attack' rule which keep Fighter types both static and ineffective. Fighter's improved save vs Fear is something, but the weak saves issue from 3e seems retained also. I liked the nerfing of Shapechange type spells but overall I didn't see enough to attract me over from 4e.

 

[S'mon]

I don't like iterative attacks much either, but we decided to keep them in large part to maintain backward compatibility with 3.5.

The Vital Strike feat is a good way to lay out more damage even after a move.

Thanks for giving the rules a look!

--Erik

You're welcome.

I'll keep Pathfinder under consideration - it does look like all the changes you guys did make were positive ones (I really like the tweaks you did make to the Fighter BTW, especially that he's no longer crippled by his armour), there just weren't quite enough of them. I'd have liked to see all classes get at least 4 skill ranks/level, and I don't think personal-interaction skills like Diplomacy should ever be restricted by class.

Anyway, I think I'm likeliest to want to run Kingmaker with either 4e D&D (if tabletop) or maybe a retro-clone like Labyrinth Lord for online play. Dragon Warriors is also a possibility that occurred to me; its Knight class might work well with this set-up. I'll be interested to see how convertible #1 looks.

 

[S'mon]

For the Iterative Attack thing, and other niceties, look at Trailblazer by Bad Axe games for "fixes".

New iterative attack:
Bab +6, 2 at -2
Bab +11, 2 at -1
Bab + 16, 2 at 0 (ie. highest)

-- david
Papa.DRB

That's interesting, thanks. I guess running 3e I rarely ever see iterative attacks actually used anyway, because I rarely ever see a situation where a Fighter type is standing beside an opponent long enough to use them! Offence so overwhelms defense at higher levels that any opponent tough enough to survive the first round of contact (when the Fighter has to move, so no full attack) is tough enough to shred the Fighter before his turn comes round again.