Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder BETA - Some Sizzle, Not Much Steak

[Wulf Ratbane]

The 15 minute work day isn't a flaw based on abilities or spells or what have you, it's a flaw based on the playing style in which you throw out everything you've got at the first sign of danger.

Sigh. Here we go again.

Your solution to this problem is a flaw based on YOUR playing style that requires you to pussyfoot around with the players in the first few encounters. By definition, you're asserting that the first encounter is not, in fact, the most dangerous encounter.

Let's take a perfectly typical scenario: the PCs are attacking an orc lair.

The very first encounter is at the mouth of the lair. It is well-guarded. And why wouldn't it be? That's why you post guards, after all.

After a difficult fight that required all their resources, the PCs are left with a choice-- continue into the lair in a weakened state, or retreat.

Take it from there.

What do you do?

And if they DO decide to do it, don't let them rest. Teach them to ration. Or even more fun, target the one who does it the most and give them a unique curse that can't just be cured with magic, that gets worse as they rest

That's your solution?

Genius.

 

[Treebore]

I wasn't going to jump into this, but...

Lets say you are in a zoo armed with a revolver (loaded with two shots) and a bowie knife (don't ask why.) Suddenly, the power goes out and all the animals are free. As you are moving toward the exist, a hungry black bear stands in your way, and is beginning to come at you...

Do you fire your revolver hoping to kill it (but leaving you with no bullets for if you meet the lion?) or try your hand at saving those bullets and use the bowie knife (getting injured in the process, but saving bullets you may or may not need?)

...

Rationing of power makes sense from a game mechanical aspect, but if you are in mortal danger, it makes MUCH more sense to take out your opponent quickly (minimizing casualties/collateral damage) and retreat. This is doubly true if you are in unfamiliar settings or unaware of your oppositions troop strength. (As is typical in most dungeons). As one player I know said; "Blowing your spells and only covering two rooms a day is preferable to the 5,000 gp diamond needed to raise someone for going into that third room."

Sadly, assuming that you are facing encounters of equal strength (not kobolds at 10th level), it makes sense to fire early, fire often, and use your best stuff on the foe you see rather than save if for the foe that MIGHT be around the next corridor...

Not to bash 4E, but in my opinion it is moving further and further away from "realistic simulation" and just closer to being a "game".

Soon arrows will be limitless as well.

People are terrified of "One shot one kill" spells, so those are gone. So it makes sense that they would also demand that they be able to have 10 encounters per day, have 25 HP at first level, etc...

Too few want there to be any sense of real risk or challenge, they just want to kill things and take their stuff, without sweating "survival".

I mean who wants to play a game where a character they have spent hours and hours playing dies? Thats too much like someone living to being 25 and being shot and killed on the street corner. A waste of precious time/life.

So put up the padded walls, pad the rocks, and ground, put on life jackets, and load up on the rubber arrows and bolts, and switch to wooden swords.

Challenge is now an illusion. Hardly anyone dies now. Now PC deaths are only by accident.

 

[Remathilis]

Not to bash 4E, but in my opinion it is moving further and further away from "realistic simulation" and just closer to being a "game".

Soon arrows will be limitless as well.

People are terrified of "One shot one kill" spells, so those are gone. So it makes sense that they would also demand that they be able to have 10 encounters per day, have 25 HP at first level, etc...

Too few want there to be any sense of real risk or challenge, they just want to kill things and take their stuff, without sweating "survival".

I mean who wants to play a game where a character they have spent hours and hours playing dies? Thats too much like someone living to being 25 and being shot and killed on the street corner. A waste of precious time/life.

So put up the padded walls, pad the rocks, and ground, put on life jackets, and load up on the rubber arrows and bolts, and switch to wooden swords.

Challenge is now an illusion. Hardly anyone dies now. Now PC deaths are only by accident.

Wow. Just wow.

You just compared having a PC die to having a person shot on the street?

I'm done with you. Goodbye.

 

[Treebore]

Wow. Just wow.

You just compared having a PC die to having a person shot on the street?

I'm done with you. Goodbye.

Yep. Good bye.

 

[Mort]

So put up the padded walls, pad the rocks, and ground, put on life jackets, and load up on the rubber arrows and bolts, and switch to wooden swords.

Challenge is now an illusion. Hardly anyone dies now. Now PC deaths are only by accident.

Tell that to all the parties that have suffered TPK's in 4e adventures; just looking at these boards there are quite a few.

 

[MrGrenadine]

Kudos to Paizo on the release of the Beta, and thanks to the OP and everyone for this thread. Its interesting to see how folks are reacting to it.

As for me, I'm not disappointed at all. One of my weekly 3.5 campaigns switched to Pathfinder Alpha rules a few weeks ago, and we're especially loving the channel positive energy mechanic and the way casters aren't completely depleted of useful spells after an encounter or two. As for the subsystems added for barbarians and monks etc, it doesn't bother me if they're complex. I love that different classes actually work differently, and I'll learn those systems if and when I play one of those classes.

But maybe my enjoyment of Pathfinder comes from the fact that I never expected it to be the end-all of RPGs, just a way I can continue playing 3.5--a system I truly enjoy, for all its faults. And though PF has addressed most of the issues that I thought could use some tweaking, its not surprising to me that PF doesn't conform to every houserule and address every pet peeve in people's heads. The fact is that for those of us who really enjoy playing 3.5, its not only a currently-supported alternative, but it brings a lot of great new ideas to the table. As for ways that its still lacking, as others have stated, the best way to get your ideas added and pet peeves addressed is to communicate directly with Paizo--they've conveniently created a system that encourages such participation.

Until then, keep in mind that Pathfinder, like 3.5 and 4e, is yours to play how you want to. Want to stick to 3.5 Core but just add channel positive energy and the hp boost? Fine. Want to go all Pathfinder but add Concentration back as a skill? Sounds good. Want high level play to be more challenging and efficient? Design your own solution, if you don't like what Paizo has done.

I'm certainly going to mix and match some, the same as every D&D campaign I've played in over the past 22 years.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The fifteen minute workday has never been a major problem in my group because our casters are normally willing to use alternate forms of attacks at low levels and rarely run out of spells at high level.

Wizards being willing to behave like fragile men at arms isn't really a fix in my mind.

An anecdote of one group who does stop every 15 minutes is meaningless unless you can show that every group does the same in that same dungeon.

No, it's not meaningless. You said it was a mental problem, and I showed that my players (who aren't dummies) ran into it repeatedly. I even showed where to get a detailed log of how it went down, so you could see that they weren't being frivolous with their abilities.

Now, maybe all the people complaining about the 15 minute workday are the readers of my Story Hour, which is secretly WAY more popular than I realize, but I doubt it. Despite your group's experiences, I suspect my group's experiences aren't uncommon at low levels.

2) Casters now have a short range attack that is always 'on.'

Good. 4E also does the same thing. It's funny how controversial reserve feats were, but it looks like the successors to 3.5 all agreed it was the right way to go. Even if it's no more damaging than a crossbow bolt, letting the wizard be a wizard is important, IMO.

4) Casters have unlimited 0 level spells. Daze in particular is almost always a good low level choice now.

Daze, even in 3.5, is almost too good. Being able to cast it all the time would certainly make it a bread and butter spell.

Thanks for the breakdown. Pathfinder does seem like it's addressed that particular issue.

If the final version cuts down on DM workload -- I'm actually running two forks of the campaign, one in Freeport, one all over the world -- we'll definitely take a look at it.

 

[Treebore]

Tell that to all the parties that have suffered TPK's in 4e adventures; just looking at these boards there are quite a few.

I have. They didn't always give enough details, but a lot of those were in 4 PC parties. 6 PC parties and higher just had PC's go unconcious most of the time. Plus we don't know how "smartly" the healing surges and such were being used, if the number of opponents were changed by the DM, etc...

So its hard to say how many of those deaths were due to "accidents" IE weak play, or weak DMing, or due to solid play and too many rolls going against the party.

So all I can judge it by is how its been playing for my group.

Like in the battle against Irontooth, we only had two go unconcious, and even then it was because the MAge ate up all our available surges because he insisted on being in melee range and casting spells in melee range. Plus we did not have a Cleric, only a Paladin and Warlord.

So that encounter was quasi exciting for us, but more due to a reckless mage and not having a cleric. If our cleric had shown for that encounter it would have been cake.

Plus another factor for us was our DM treated each wave as a new encounter, which allowed us to get our Surges and other per encounter attacks back. So that helped. Still, if the Cleric had made the session, I think we would still have won without treating each wave as a new encounter.

So I am sure there are plenty of variables that will allow people to argue my opinions, but hey, opinions are to be argued.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Yes, but aren't things like this feedback? Shouldn't Paizo be paying attention to threads like this too and take note? A review of the game (beta or not) should give the designers feedback.

That's been my problem with this whole process. Pathfinder fans (and, frankly, even some of the Pathfinder team) have come across as suggesting that not all feedback is equal. While that's obviously true, it certainly suggests the whole "if you have a problem with something, say, so it's BETA" is a bit of an exaggeration: If you have a problem with something, say so, but don't be shocked if you get shouted down by the true believers.

That said I'm interested in seeing what Green Ronin could put out for a fantasy game. He (Chris Pramas) was musing a while back on a non d20 "with D&D feel" game he would eventually like to do.

If Pathfinder hadn't come along, I wouldn't have been surprised if he had pushed True20 much, much harder than he has. I'm also curious what the Song and Ice system looks like.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The 15 minute work day isn't a flaw based on abilities or spells or what have you, it's a flaw based on the playing style in which you throw out everything you've got at the first sign of danger. It's a flaw you're going to see in every game in existence if your players want to do it.

In the first few levels of 3.5, that means the casters either don't cast spells in most encounters, or they've failed, in your mind, by actually doing what their class is supposed to do.

In 3E, low level spells were made a lot less impressive than they were in 1E and 2E. Unfortunately, the amount of spells a character can cast when those spells are all they've got was not sufficiently raised to compensate.

Given how many people only start play at middle levels, it's not a personal failing of players wanting to, you know, play their characters, it's a problem with 3E as it's designed.

If a magic missile did twice as much damage as a crossbow bolt, there might be a reason to ration it the way it is, but until third level, you're actually worse off casting the spell as a wizard instead of using a crossbow, unless you have terrible Dexterity.

This is not a design that merits defending.