Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Pathfinder Playtest: Rulebook
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7560863" data-attributes="member: 12731"><p><strong>1 out of 5 rating for Pathfinder Playtest: Rulebook</strong></p><p></p><p>I think the playtest went in entirely the wrong direction. </p><p></p><p>First off - providing a wealth of options is not a substitute for providing a clear designer vision. I get that they want freedom of choice. But the core of D&D has always been the limitations. It is the limits that provide the backbone of interesting charbuilding.</p><p></p><p>But there's a difference between giving Rangers, say, a class ability at level 5 on one hand, and providing a feat granting the ability, and then saying only Rangers can take that feat. In the first case, context makes it reasonable that Rangers get the ability... and that the fact the ability is not present for Fighters is not a big deal, since Fighters get something else at that level. </p><p></p><p>But if you look at a feat in isolation, you start thinking "why can X get this and not Y". Feats are best used for general abilities you <strong>don't</strong> want to make class exclusive. (Hint: that's why you put them in the Feats chapter and not the Classes chapter!) </p><p></p><p>Besides, don't make it all about feats. Not only does it make it incredibly hard to get a quick overview of a class, it opens up a lot of arguments as to why class A got ability B but class C didn't get ability D.</p><p></p><p>Presenting a class as just a cluster of feats is incredibly intimidating to any player but the most hardened veterans. You can't get a feel for a class by just browsing the section - you must go into hair-raising detail to analyse what class N is about, and how it differs from class M.</p><p></p><p>---</p><p></p><p>Other than that the playtest shows having learnt zero lessons from the failure of 4th edition. Zero lessons from the success of 5th edition. </p><p></p><p>It comes across as a rehash of Pathfinder 1, but still a wholly incompatible such rehash. So who is this product for?</p><p></p><p>Sorry but this shows all the signs of having been designed in a vacuum, with no real idea of how to attract either existing Pathfinder fans or the huge number of rpg gamers (90% of which have 5th edition D&D as their entry game).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 7560863, member: 12731"] [b]1 out of 5 rating for Pathfinder Playtest: Rulebook[/b] I think the playtest went in entirely the wrong direction. First off - providing a wealth of options is not a substitute for providing a clear designer vision. I get that they want freedom of choice. But the core of D&D has always been the limitations. It is the limits that provide the backbone of interesting charbuilding. But there's a difference between giving Rangers, say, a class ability at level 5 on one hand, and providing a feat granting the ability, and then saying only Rangers can take that feat. In the first case, context makes it reasonable that Rangers get the ability... and that the fact the ability is not present for Fighters is not a big deal, since Fighters get something else at that level. But if you look at a feat in isolation, you start thinking "why can X get this and not Y". Feats are best used for general abilities you [B]don't[/B] want to make class exclusive. (Hint: that's why you put them in the Feats chapter and not the Classes chapter!) Besides, don't make it all about feats. Not only does it make it incredibly hard to get a quick overview of a class, it opens up a lot of arguments as to why class A got ability B but class C didn't get ability D. Presenting a class as just a cluster of feats is incredibly intimidating to any player but the most hardened veterans. You can't get a feel for a class by just browsing the section - you must go into hair-raising detail to analyse what class N is about, and how it differs from class M. --- Other than that the playtest shows having learnt zero lessons from the failure of 4th edition. Zero lessons from the success of 5th edition. It comes across as a rehash of Pathfinder 1, but still a wholly incompatible such rehash. So who is this product for? Sorry but this shows all the signs of having been designed in a vacuum, with no real idea of how to attract either existing Pathfinder fans or the huge number of rpg gamers (90% of which have 5th edition D&D as their entry game). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Pathfinder Playtest: Rulebook
Top