Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="humble minion" data-source="post: 4708681" data-attributes="member: 5948">I think Paizo made something of a tactical error by not including (or at least foreshadowing) their fixes to high-level play in the PF beta.Everyone knows system breakdown during high-level play is a big issue in 3.5.  Paizo release a beta ruleset that doesn't address this at all, but mention in various messageboard posts that they'll get to it later.Big mistake for a number of reasons:- People who download the rules and give it a cursory look-over or maybe a quick playtest (but who don't haunt the messageboards) will conclude that it doesn't solve the high-level problems of 3.5, and some may be turned off it for that reason.- The promised fixes to high-level play will not get the benefit of the open beta playtest.  Given the delicacy and thoroughness required in balancing high-level d20 stuff, the relatively short timescales involved, and the relatively small Paizo employee base available for playtesting, this has got to be asking for loopholes and rules glitches to slip through the net.- It just plain looks bad.  If Paizo were planning to fix 3.5e, then making the first priority tiny tweaks of class features, skill lists, and minor power boosts, while leaving the massive numerical breakdown problems of the entire system at high levels til a seeming afterthought doesn't inspire confidence.  Surely you'd fix the big, systemic stuff first, and leave the minor details of class balance for later?  It smacks of a disorganised approach to design, and a project lacking in clear strategic goals or any sort of overarcing plan.I'd love to be wrong, but for the above reasons I'm adopting a very wait-and-see approach to Pathfinder, no matter how much I usually love Paizo stuff.</blockquote>

Verification