Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder outselling D&D

[Theo R Cwithin]

It actually is my playstyle. The problem is that certain classes are so broken in 3E that it can outshine any cooperative aspect.

... iff the DM doesn't adjust accordingly. I admit that straight up. You have to change? expand? re-examine? the nature of the challenges so Mr.Wizard can't bail out the whole party every single time.

Yeah remember my original claim about turning people away who have never played the game before. You just conceeded the fact that it will confused the hell out of people who have never played any rpg before.

This however, I honestly don't follow. If a newbie is hopping into 3e with a 17th level fighter, alongside players of druids, clerics and wizards who have no interest in helping him out, then sure. That would be a huge turn off.

But as near as I can tell, most newbies get their hands held, or newbie groups start out at 1st level and work their way up, learning the rules slowly. And when the imbalances become obvious, they do something about it: look it up online, study the rules, look into house rules fixes, deal with it, or even *gasp* choose to play a different game.

That said, I do have some faith in the kinds of people who game to make the choice that right for them. I recall an awful lot of us stupid kids back in school playing wahoo games rife with imbalances (both inherent & houseruled in)-- and still having a blast, despite the poorly wrtten books and oftimes unclear or contradictory rules. That is to say, we somehow had (and continue to have) lots of fun, despite what the arbiters of "fun" say.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Hmmm... the fact that I don't see it is immaterial but the fact that you do isn't. How nice for you.

I think this illuminates why one single approach to design isn't in the interest of the gaming community. I for one am glad the different preferences are catered to by various rpgs. It is a good thing dannager has a game balanced around individual encounters that he can enjoy. Its good for me that there are systems out there which allow for power discrepancies and bslance around the campaign rather than encounters. And its good bill has a game he likes playing. But if all designers suddenly decided to embrace tge same rubric when it came to balance then chances are two of the three would be pretty dissapointed with their options.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Sorta, I mean builds were not very balanced. But no one could be good at everything and thats what helped. i mean a friend of mine loved making combative brujah. He was so good at it, his characters could often have mashed every other PC at the same time in a fair fight and won. yet he was of limited use in some social situations or investigation etc.

But yes I would say some powers where way better than others and everyone knew it. Like level 2 protean which let you grow wolf claws was one of the most powerful abilities in the game. Since it did aggravated damage and most things had no defense against it. (think of it like a attack that bypassed DR but that all creatures had DR as their primary defense). So most ST's would limit PC's abilities to learn things like protean 2 and stuff. But cause the game was heavily story and RP focused even those that ruled at combat couldn't use combat to solve every problem, so everyone had moments to shine typically.

Heck, in the old WoD my favorite Clan is the one widely considered the weakest - the Nosferatu. And I never noticed any lack of Nos in the LARPs I played in either. Nos were good at what they were good at. Drop them into combat, and the drop would continue, as the poor bugger dove for the sewers.

The Auld Grump

 

[prosfilaes]

Yeah remember my original claim about turning people away who have never played the game before. You just conceeded the fact that it will confused the hell out of people who have never played any rpg before.

In certain circumstances, you need to help the new players through. So what? It's been done for 28 years with success. There's no evidence that suddenly now balance is crucial to the survival of the game.

 

[BryonD]

Hmmm... the fact that I don't see it is immaterial but the fact that you do isn't. How nice for you.

Actually, that you don't see it demonstrates that it is not implicit in the system and claims that it is the systems fault are shown baseless.

It certainly may be that for some people it is implicit. Missing a curve ball is going to be implicit for me, but I'd be deeply mistaken to present that as evidence of a flawed bat.

 

[Dark Mistress]

Heck, in the old WoD my favorite Clan is the one widely considered the weakest - the Nosferatu. And I never noticed any lack of Nos in the LARPs I played in either. Nos were good at what they were good at. Drop them into combat, and the drop would continue, as the poor bugger dove for the sewers.

The Auld Grump

I liked the Lasombra, Toreador and Malkavians myself. But I tended to play social characters too.

 

[Beginning of the End]

Its not really echochambers. Its one of the most common houserules for the 3.5E system because the game is so imbalanced that you can basically remove any sense of challenge that the game has and make other classes utterly pointless.

Yawn.

You know, it really can't be repeated often enough: In order for the 15-minute adventuring day and spellcaster-domination to imbalance a campaign, it requires a very specific, a very limited, and a very narrow style of play.

And for most of the game's meaningful range, this style of play requires complicity on the part of the DM.

If you don't like the problem, then don't play in that very specific, very limited, and very narrow way. Problem solved.

 

[IronWolf]

Its not really echochambers. Its one of the most common houserules for the 3.5E system because the game is so imbalanced that you can basically remove any sense of challenge that the game has and make other classes utterly pointless.

Have you explained what this common house rule is yet?

 

[MacMathan]

Heck, in the old WoD my favorite Clan is the one widely considered the weakest - the Nosferatu. And I never noticed any lack of Nos in the LARPs I played in either. Nos were good at what they were good at. Drop them into combat, and the drop would continue, as the poor bugger dove for the sewers.

The Auld Grump

I loved the Gangrel and Malkavians. We also played the card game alot too.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Yawn.

You know, it really can't be repeated often enough: In order for the 15-minute adventuring day and spellcaster-domination to imbalance a campaign, it requires a very specific, a very limited, and a very narrow style of play.

And for most of the game's meaningful range, this style of play requires complicity on the part of the DM.

If you don't like the problem, then don't play in that very specific, very limited, and very narrow way. Problem solved.

Play nice. I agree, but....

I had one group that used to 'Play the 15 Minute Day Way! (TM)'

I then ran scenarios where the bad guys did things, and didn't wait around 23.75 hours out of each day. If the party adventured for only 15 minutes then they failed. Monsters would follow them back to camp after the wizard went nova, and attack when the party's spells were down.

Eventually they figured it out.

But that was the only time it ever happened. My problem in the kids game for Pathfinder is telling the kids that their heroes need to rest. The grown ups game has a wizard who saves spells for when he needs them, sometimes not using them when the party does need them. (Wands help with this last.)

Like the golf bag o' weapons the 15 minute day is more often mentioned than seen.

The Auld Grump