Is There Possibility of a PF1.5 or a 3.5 Revival? Whether Directly or Something With Similar 'Ethos'

[GobHag]

Yeah something that I expected to see is not just 'compatible' games but also games that uave a similar ethos as 3e/PF1, like a Lancer for 3e don't exist for instance

 

[Pedantic]

Fundamentally, 3e is a massive design task. I just don't know that anyone wants to do it again, for what is now a tiny and shrinking corner of the market. It made a lot more sense when its assumptions were normative.

 

[Edgar Ironpelt]

"Christmas tree required" problems are a combination of three things, most of which I've already mentioned, but to reiterate - wide tier gaps between classes resulting in differences in gear dependency to be useful, too many spells with absolute effects, and increasing gaps in the DC of saves versus the bonus of the poor saves. And even then, that's mostly high level 3.X problems. I suppose you could exacerbate it with encounter design where you run one single high CR foe per day of adventuring.

A fourth point that pushed "christmas tree outfitting" was the inflated cost of more powerful items over weaker ones. For example +3 armor was 9000 gp, while +1 armor, +1 shield, and +1 amulet of Natural Armor came to only 4000 gp total.

So that aspect of the system pushed for "lots of items" over "a few big cool items."

 

[Bill Zebub]

Those who want Old School are largely being funneled into OSR,

You make it sound like those players are not making informed choices but instead are being unknowingly manipulated by..."them".

 

[Celebrim]

A fourth point that pushed "christmas tree outfitting" was the inflated cost of more powerful items over weaker ones. For example +3 armor was 9000 gp, while +1 armor, +1 shield, and +1 amulet of Natural Armor came to only 4000 gp total.

So that aspect of the system pushed for "lots of items" over "a few big cool items."

Well, that part of the system I didn't mind. First of all, it is necessary to balance magical item crafting. If all items are available to the player, there has to be a considerable cost to crafting the more desirable ones. And secondly, players in my experience love loot, and when dropping treasure = XP, the only loot that directly excites the player because of how it can improve their character sheet is magic items. Having slots you can feel with even quite weak items lets you give out a decent amount of loot.

I experimented early in 3.X with more numinous magic using magic items having quirks, and it stopped working at quite low level because it was too much for me as a GM to track. I had to remember the interactions of a half-dozen items and their secrets. More than 4 or 5 was too much. So the compromise I ended up with was a relatively large number of straight forward items and a few more powerful complex items that I was very familiar with that were carrying the weight of "magic is strange and dangerous" for the setting.

What I meant by the "Christmas Tree is required" problem was that certain things like Cloak of Resistance, Amulet of Health, Gloves of Dexterity and so forth were considered at many tables to be essential to maintaining game balance, primarily because they made up for the gap in defenses between what you would have without magic items and what the design of higher level monsters assumed was the sort of defenses a character would have. And because your wealth had to go to procuring these essential basic items with obvious and general utility, you couldn't have wacky weird magic items at all, as it was always better to sell these and procure the basic Christmas tree decorations. Furthermore, to keep the game balanced, you had to as a GM ensure the players were moving up the Christmas Tree ladder continually.

I understand why that was a problem at some tables, I'm just saying that my play style and my house rules largely evaded that. It might have come into play at higher levels, but at the level I was playing (when the game went on hiatus from Covid they were about 10th level) it just wasn't an issue.

 

[Staffan]

What I meant by the "Christmas Tree is required" problem was that certain things like Cloak of Resistance, Amulet of Health, Gloves of Dexterity and so forth were considered at many tables to be essential to maintaining game balance, primarily because they made up for the gap in defenses between what you would have without magic items and what the design of higher level monsters assumed was the sort of defenses a character would have. And because your wealth had to go to procuring these essential basic items with obvious and general utility, you could have wacky weird magic items at all, as it was always better to sell these and procure the basic Christmas tree decorations. Furthermore, to keep the game balanced, you had to as a GM ensure the players were moving up the Christmas Tree ladder continually.

Another problem is that "NPCs are made with the same rules as PCs" and "PCs need magic items to get the stats the game system expects" combine to "NPCs need to be loaded down with magic items to get appropriate stats." This in turn means that any time the PCs defeat a group of moderate-level NPCs, they acquire half a dozen of +1 to +2 items per NPC and those are worth the same as a small village.

That's also why banditry doesn't work.

 

[Alzrius]

Another problem is that "NPCs are made with the same rules as PCs" and "PCs need magic items to get the stats the game system expects" combine to "NPCs need to be loaded down with magic items to get appropriate stats."

That doesn't quite follow, because one of the few ways that NPCs are different from PCs in 3.X is that the former have their own wealth-by-level guidelines, and they're markedly lower than what the PCs get. (The other difference is that most NPCs of importance typically have a stat block of 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, which works out to less than the point-buy value that PCs receive in a lot of campaigns.) That this results in their having weaker stats than PCs who are otherwise comparable to them is the intended results, since the system is set up so that an "even" fight is one in which the PCs are heavily favored to win.

In other words, the NPCs are built using the same rules that PCs are in terms of stat block construction, but aren't advanced to the degree that PCs of the same level are (at least in terms of money and innate talent).

 

[Staffan]

That doesn't quite follow, because one of the few ways that NPCs are different from PCs in 3.X is that the former have their own wealth-by-level guidelines, and they're markedly lower than what the PCs get. (The other difference is that most NPCs of importance typically have a stat block of 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, which works out to less than the point-buy value that PCs receive in a lot of campaigns.) That this results in their having weaker stats than PCs who are otherwise comparable to them is the intended results, since the system is set up so that an "even" fight is one in which the PCs are heavily favored to win.

In other words, the NPCs are built using the same rules that PCs are in terms of stat block construction, but aren't advanced to the degree that PCs of the same level are (at least in terms of money and innate talent).

Sure, they get somewhat lesser stats for the same level than PCs, partially because they have less money and worse base stats, but they still get a lot of what power they do have from their magic items. Which might be even worse, because it means that it's really rare for an NPC to have gear that's actually an upgrade from what the PCs already have – it's just loot to be sold and exchanged for better stuff. As I recall, the NPC gear guidelines worked out to about 3x the normal treasure for that CR, and since loot sold for 50% of it's value it works out to 1.5x times normal treasure.

I remember that in several Pathfinder adventures, NPCs "cheated" the guidelines by using consumables instead of permanents. A potion of bull's strength might only last for one fight, but most NPCs will only ever be in one on-screen fight anyway.

 

[payn]

Another problem is that "NPCs are made with the same rules as PCs" and "PCs need magic items to get the stats the game system expects" combine to "NPCs need to be loaded down with magic items to get appropriate stats." This in turn means that any time the PCs defeat a group of moderate-level NPCs, they acquire half a dozen of +1 to +2 items per NPC and those are worth the same as a small village.

That's also why banditry doesn't work.

While I agree with the assessment, I think the problem is assumed magic items and wealth by level and not NPCs built as PCs.

 

[Staffan]

While I agree with the assessment, I think the problem is assumed magic items and wealth by level and not NPCs built as PCs.

It's the combination of both. Pathfinder 2 also has assumed magic items per level (though less strict than 3e) for PCs, but just gives NPCs/creatures desired stats for their level. Why does this guard have a +15 attack bonus? Because they're a 5th level creature with a melee focus and thus that's the appropriate attack bonus. I don't have to design the guard as a 5th level fighter with Str 16 (and quaffing a potion to get to 20) and the Weapon Focus feat and a masterwork weapon to get to the +12 that'd give them in 3e. I just decide "5th level melee dude, that's +15.". If they happen to have a magic weapon, it's because I want to give it as loot to the PCs.