Pathfinder 1E What Direction is Pathfinder Headed In?

[RangerWickett]

For monsters, I really think 4e has a good design, in general. Some of the powers are unbelievable (e.g., chokers can strangle you from 10 ft. away, and you cannot hurt them because they're out of reach of your melee attacks), but in general, 4e monsters are easy and intriguing to run in combat.

Now, 4e really short-changes the flavor; I guess they figure they can release all that 'fluff stuff' in Dragon online. But I don't see a compelling reason for Pathfinder to keep using the same monster creation rules that 3e does. Just create "monster classes" with clear guidelines as to what makes for balanced offensive ratings, hp, saves, etc.

You can still use old stat blocks, but streamline the system for creating new monsters. But apparently that option isn't on the table. I don't understand why.

 

[Henry]

For monsters, I really think 4e has a good design, in general. Some of the powers are unbelievable (e.g., chokers can strangle you from 10 ft. away, and you cannot hurt them because they're out of reach of your melee attacks)...

Haven't trolls and ogres been doing this since 2000, however?

I do hope Pathfinder does do some more streamlining, because I can forsee my group playing some of it in the year to come; our group is not 100% sold on 4E, so we'll probably be switching between 4E and either Pathfinder, or 3.5.

 

[Mark Hope]

Don't blame The People. And don't blame The Man.

This need for some sort of permission stems from the fact that 3E had morphed the collective soul of gaming into a "there must be a rule somewhere for that and i must follow it" mantra.

Ostensibly, the Power was taken away from the DM and given to the players & DM via shared, common, standard rules. Gone were the days 1E DM fiat.

And yet, what happened was that the Power was taken away from DMs and given to...the rulebooks. 3E has a rule for flippin' everything. And the mindset became - overnight - that a DM who didn't know or follow those rules was somehow cheating his players or the game.

Indeed. And there was no overt instruction that 3e should be played this way - it just sort of developed of its own accord as far as I could tell.

I'm happy to have a solid ruleset to fall back on when I need it, but a shackle it is not. I've always said that 3e's greatest failing was a lack of sound, explicit advice early on in the edition's life telling players and DMs that they could make free with the rules as and when they saw fit. Yes, there was Rule 0, but precious little else besides. I think that 3e suffered from a hidebound mentality as a result.

I don't play 4e, but this is definitely something that it has done right - make it clear right from the outset that rules are just tools - you don't have to use them.

 

[Voadam]

I think it'd be ok to just give the goblin 5 HD, the needed HP, attack bonus, etc., tack on the fireball (and whatever other spells if any), and run with it.

Something like this, for example (I'm actually in my office doing network stuff and my books are nowhere close, so keep that in mind )

Marshnek of the Fire Swamp CR 5
Goblin, 5th-Level Caster
NE Small Humanoid (Goblinoid)
Hit Dice: 5d8+5 (35 hp)
Initiative: +1
Speed: 30 ft. (6 squares)
Armor Class: 14, touch 12, flat-footed 13
Base Attack/Grapple: +3/-1
Attack: Morningstar +4 melee (1d6) or javelin +4 ranged (1d4)
Full Attack: Morningstar +4 melee (1d6) or javelin +4 ranged (1d4)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Spells
Special Qualities: Darkvision 60 ft.
Saves: Fort +2, Ref +2, Will +5
Abilities: Str 11, Dex 13, Con 12, Int 14, Wis 12, Cha 8
Skills: Stealth +9, Perception +9

Spells Prepared (4/4/3/1; DC 12 + spell level):
1st-true strike, magic missile (x2), burning hands;
2nd-blur, darkness, scorching ray;
3rd-fireball

He should I guess have 0-level spells, but I omitted them. He's also using his Dex mod on all attack rolls just as if he had the Weapon Fin. feat (which wouldnt work with his morningstar anyway).

I'm not seeing a lot of benefit for ease of goblin creation between choosing to go with goblin HD for some aspects (HD, BAB, armor? skills) while using wizard class features and archetypes for the others (stat choices, saves, spell casting except arcane spell failure) and the standard of goblin race with all wizard class features (HD, hp, BAB, saves, spells).

It seems to take just as long, just as many calculations or recalculations, and only ends up with a slightly tougher and more martial monster goblin wizard 5 than a PC wizard 5.

I can only see some time saved if it was something like a rakshasa going from d8 outsider HD to d4 sorcerer ones where you have to mix different types together under RAW.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

It seems to take just as long, just as many calculations or recalculations, and only ends up with a slightly tougher and more martial monster goblin wizard 5 than a PC wizard 5.

I think it's possible to get "lost" in the statblock so that it looks like there's more calculation going on than there really is.

Here's how I would do it-- all on the fly, all in my head, just jotting the notes down on the scratch page as I do it.

Given: I'm already looking at a goblin statblock (probably printed from here.

My 5th level goblin spellcaster adds:

12-13 hit points, plus 5HDxCON.
+2 BAB (that I'll probably never use)
+4 Will save (the Good save 2+1/2 HD)
+2 other saves (~1/2 the "Good" bonus)
Concentration skill maxxed out at 8 ranks

And he casts spells, as needed, as follows: a limit of 3rd level spells; up to 3 spells of each level; without even thinking about spell slots.

He'll be dead before anything else matters.

 

[Arnwyn]

Don't blame The People. And don't blame The Man.

This need for some sort of permission stems from the fact that 3E had morphed the collective soul of gaming into a "there must be a rule somewhere for that and i must follow it" mantra.

How? By who? What decree?

If it does exist, it is by "The People", so you are indeed incorrect. Blame The People.

(And, anyone who somehow suggests that this is a real difference between 3e and 4e is, quite simply, flat-out bonkers. AFAIC.)

 

[Wisdom Penalty]

How? By who? What decree?

I don't know. I don't know. I don't know.

If it does exist, it is by "The People", so you are indeed incorrect. Blame The People.

Maybe.

(And, anyone who somehow suggests that this is a real difference between 3e and 4e is, quite simply, flat-out bonkers. AFAIC.)

Ok.

WP

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I have definitely observed a difference in folks way of thinking between 3e and 4e, with regards to DM empowerment, winging it, etc.

Folks greeted the "Wing it!" philosophy of 4e as if it were some dazzling breakthrough in design.

 

[Wisdom Penalty]

I have definitely observed a difference in folks way of thinking between 3e and 4e, with regards to DM empowerment, winging it, etc.

Folks greeted the "Wing it!" philosophy of 4e as if it were some dazzling breakthrough in design.

You're bonkers.

 

[RefinedBean]

I have definitely observed a difference in folks way of thinking between 3e and 4e, with regards to DM empowerment, winging it, etc.

Folks greeted the "Wing it!" philosophy of 4e as if it were some dazzling breakthrough in design.

Too true. I have a good friend who runs a 3.5 game (which I'm sadly not part of) where he basically just wings THE ENTIRE THING, using base assumptions and common sense. He'll flip through the MM now and then, but that's about it. He's never had problems with it, and gets confused when people say "But isn't 4E way easier?!"

If we played game systems for simplicity, we wouldn't pick any of the D&D systems, I imagine.