Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder page count change

[James Jacobs]

Do you want third parties to be able to make modules with the gods or fleshing out the gods with splatbook stuff?

Pros: support for Golarion CS and compatible material with PF modules.

Cons: No control over stuff others create or directly profit off the derivative works/No longer exclusive provider of those types of things for PF gods.

We want third parties to be able to make modules set in generic worlds or their own campaign settings, with no real input from us at all. We want to control actual Golarion content more tightly—while we would certainly be interested in having third parties publish Golarion content, they'd have to do so under a separate license from Paizo, not the SRD OGL license. And we'd want to retain final approvals of anything set in Golarion.

The names of the deities in Golarion are closed content, as a result, similar to how the names of the Greyhawk deities in the 3.5 rules were closed.

 

[Zaister]

The names of the deities in Golarion are closed content, as a result, similar to how the names of the Greyhawk deities in the 3.5 rules were closed.

That is perfectly sensible.

 

[carmachu]

I think that may be too expensive for a single book.

Especially if you're just a casual player and never a GM.

No not really. Depends on what you think for quality. I at first thought $119 was too much fo Ptolus. But turns out it was worth every penny.

 

[JoeGKushner]

No not really. Depends on what you think for quality. I at first thought $119 was too much fo Ptolus. But turns out it was worth every penny.

Certainly true in all cases.

For example, some feel that the core Player's Handbook at $34.95 is too expensive.

It'll all depend on what players feel they'll be getting for their buck. GMs and players are both buyers, but generally not the same type of buyers.

 

[Alzrius]

I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this already, but will the Pathfinder Core Rulebook have anything regarding epic levels? I ask because even the 3.5 DMG had abbreviated epic advancement rules.

 

[James Jacobs]

I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this already, but will the Pathfinder Core Rulebook have anything regarding epic levels? I ask because even the 3.5 DMG had abbreviated epic advancement rules.

I'd like to have SOMETHING like the abbreviated epic rules... if only so that a GM can throw a 22nd level wizard at a 20th level party. That said, the game's focus is on 1st–20th level... it's backwards compatible enough so that you can certainly still use the current 3.5 epic level rules, though.

In any case, we've had a lot of folk asking us about how epic rules and psionics fit into Pathfinder RPG. Both of those have their fans and their detractors, as well as a third category of players who love the concepts but hate the mechanics for how they work. I'm in that third category. I'd LOVE to do a book that reinvents and reworks epic level rules AND psionics, but that has to be a separate book, and it's a tricky prospect anyway since both systems are well-loved and it's important not to do something to them that estranges the established fans of epic rules or psionic rules.

Anyway... I suspect that the epic rules in PF RPG will be no larger than those currently appearing in the 3.5 DMG, and there's a chance they'll be even smaller. But even if they aren't mentioned at all, the 3.5 version still works for those who like that system (and again, it should be pretty compatible to PF RPG).

 

[James Jacobs]

Furthermore... we've got a few threads over at paizo.com where we're asking folks to pitch in their opinions and advice and fears and wants for books like a PF RPG Epic Rules book or a Psionic book or whatever. There's three threads:

Beyond the Core Rulebook asks what folk want from Paizo after the PF RPG is out.

What Does Psionics Mean to You? asks what you'd like to see us do with psionics.

What Does Epic Mean to You? asks what you'd like to see us do with epic rules.

If you're looking forward to the PF RPG and are a fan of Psionics or Epic Levels or some other system of rules expansion... please let us know!

 

[BryonD]

Hopefully those 63 pages satisfy the elusive "How to Fix 3e High-level Play" commitment Paizo, by direct edict of their CEO Ms. Stevens, gave to the gaming community.

Cuz I'll tell ya ladies, I just haven't seen it.

WP

Trust me when I say *YOU* won't ever see it.

The actual target audience on the other hand.....

 

[Roman]

In any case, we've had a lot of folk asking us about how epic rules and psionics fit into Pathfinder RPG. Both of those have their fans and their detractors, as well as a third category of players who love the concepts but hate the mechanics for how they work. I'm in that third category. I'd LOVE to do a book that reinvents and reworks epic level rules AND psionics, but that has to be a separate book, and it's a tricky prospect anyway since both systems are well-loved and it's important not to do something to them that estranges the established fans of epic rules or psionic rules.

I am also in the third category you mention. I love the concept of Epic levels, but despise the 3E mechanics for it and thus refuse to use standard 3E Epic levels in my campaigns. I also like the concept of Psionics and am more open to the 3E ruleset for them than to the Epic one, but I wouldn't mind a redesign there either, particularly if it distinguished Psionics further from magic. There need to be things only Psionics can do and in turn things that Psionics cannot do (when compared to magic).

Although I am not a fan of 4E in general, I think 4E has the right idea of what to do with epic levels - integrate them into the system sufficiently that no sudden 'break' is necessary like in 3E (so, for example, no disjointed epic level spellcasting system with no connection to the system in the 'standard' levels). Of course, this approach would be facilitated if you the design of epic levels into account when designing the 'standard levels' in the core book. I really hope you are taking it into account.

 

[James Jacobs]

Although I am not a fan of 4E in general, I think 4E has the right idea of what to do with epic levels - integrate them into the system sufficiently that no sudden 'break' is necessary like in 3E (so, for example, no disjointed epic level spellcasting system with no connection to the system in the 'standard' levels). Of course, this approach would be facilitated if you the design of epic levels into account when designing the 'standard levels' in the core book. I really hope you are taking it into account.

Agreed. In fact, I'd almost like to say that levels 15–20 are "EPIC" and leave it at that, but since the concept of higher than 20th level play's already pretty much built-in to the game, that's not really a good option. WotC's choice to extend the range to 30th and call 21st to 30th is an elegant solution.

The problem with epic level play as it stands, as far as I see it, is that there's no end point. The open-endedness is attractive on one level (No limits! Play the same character forever! No hard-wired end point to your advancement!), but it's also a huge disadvantage, since without an upper limit, there's no way to set a good scale. There's always SOMETHING BIGGER. I hit this problem more often than I wanted as regards feedback to the Demonomicon articles and Fiendish Codex I; no matter what CR one sets a demon lord at, it's too high for some folk and two low for others. Since you only have a starting point and not an ending point, it's VERY difficult to design anything for epic level. What's the difference between a CR 23 and 29 and 33 and 59 and 3492 creature? How do deities fit onto that scale? And if deitys DON'T fit onto that scale, then how tough does a character have to be to fight a deity? What CR is the most powerful creature in the Multiverse?

When Paizo does an Epic Level supplement for the PF RPG, my preference would be to basically present epic level play as its own game, similar to how the Immortals set worked. Once you go beyond 20th level, you start a new game in a lot of ways. You might still be "21st level" but the game assumes that's the baseline and goes from there (which argues pretty strongly to reset the "level" to 1). Of course, if we do a new game for Epic Level, I'd want to keep things transferrable between that game and the PF RPG, so that one could use a low level epic monster as a high level PF RPG monster after a hopefully simple conversion process.

At the very least, I'll be pushing to have our answer for epic rules to be a closed scale with a level cap. Open ended level caps don't work.