Pathfinder 1E Does pathfinder strike anyone as too gamey?

[gamerprinter]

1 bonus feats suck... they did in 3.0, in 3.5, and in PF. One or two over 10 levels gives you a little extra play... but that is why dipping 2 levels in fighter is way better then playing a fighter.

Warlock is the best class 3.5 ever made. It allowed cool flavorful magic without the overpowered wizard class.

Book of 9 swords was the beginning of fighters getting more then just feats, if you really like bonus feat fighter then I guess that is why you dislike giving them cool and interesting choices instead.

I hated lfqw problems, and pathfinder could have fixed them... take polymorph and change it into 100 lesser morph spells like troll form.

Witch is the best arcane caster ever designed. I like Witch, then Magus as my second favorite arcane class. I don't care for wizards, sorcerers, hexblades or warlocks.

While I recognize the Bo9S classes are martial classes, I don't get the connection to Fighters - they are not Fighters. I've played all the classes and prestige classes for Bo9S, I didn't care for the renewable cycle of spending x points, then it restarts full again. I don't care for feats that give you 3 different things you can do. Feats do one thing, not three.

Also no one in our gaming group has ever class dipped, most multi-classed during 3x days and then jumped to prestige classes. In Pathfinder, we've only got one player who has ever taken a prestige class, the rest stay as single class characters, and still nobody dips in class - ever.

Really I've never played fighters in any edition of D&D, nor full casters ever since 1977. I've only played Rangers, Paladins, Bards. And now with PF I only play paladins, rangers, magi, witches, inquisitors, samurai and ranger - I still don't play fighters. And when the PF classes do not sit right with me, I design archetypes or alternate classes for them instead, and then I usually publish them. I found the overall design of the Bo9S classes too fiddly and meh in design. I see martial classes could use a boost, but the way Bo9S did it was wrong and poorly done.

I'm the primary developer for the Kaidan setting of Japanese horror (PFRPG) as an imprint under Rite Publishing.

 

[Kramodlog]

Heck yeah, IMO change for the sake of improvement is, well, improvement!

Why? You can change something and make it worse. Seems more like game fatigue than "problems with the system".

Here, I'll ask a leading edition warrior question of my own: Is stagnation for the sake of nostalgia, often called tradition, automatically good?

This is a leading question. You assume nostalgia has something to do with it.

I guarantee you that 5e will be canceled in a few years,

So will Paizo.

and there will be talk of all the ways it failed to live up to its promising start.

Depends how long it last. Who would say that after 10 years or 15 years?

Not that 5e is going to fail on some fundamental level [...].

How do you know? It isn't even out yet. Seems your mind is already made.

 

[Kinak]

they invalidated a bunch of classes that were already better built then the core 3.5 class. warlock, Bo9s, and spell theif and ninja all need updateing, along with artificer...

Yeah, if Pathfinder could legally include those classes, I'd like to see a lot of them (especially warlock). But, well, the only people who can release those classes under the OGL are Wizards of the Coast. That doesn't honestly seem like something to hold against either company or system. It just is and isn't going to change.

That said, Dreamscarred Press (of Pathfinder psionics fame) is working on a spiritual successor to Bo9S called "Path of War." They're doing early testing now.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[Kramodlog]

Book of 9 swords was the beginning of fighters getting more then just feats, if you really like bonus feat fighter then I guess that is why you dislike giving them cool and interesting choices instead.

Having feats is not getting cool and interesting choices?

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Why? You can change something and make it worse. Seems more like game fatigue than "problems with the system".

That's because you don't see a problem with your favorite edition.

I've had a paizo forum account for years, and I still post there. If what you're insinuating were true -- that 3.x's issues aren't such a big deal to most D&Ders -- I'd expect the paizo forums to be free of all the debates we saw during the 2000 - 2008 era. (Is LFQW a problem? Should paladins only be LG? How do I deal with alignment? Player entitlement vs. DM god-complex, the list goes on and on.) After all, those who think these issues are problems should have converted to 4e right? Not so! All of these issues are still debated on Paizo, on ENworld, and on every forum where 3.x is discussed -- and just as hotly as ever.

Clearly, 4e isn't the solution everyone is looking for. It isn't even the solution for everyone who sees problems with 3.x. But it created solutions to problems that are very much present for many D&Ders, regardless of whether you recognize those problems or not.

This is a leading question. You assume nostalgia has something to do with it.

Leading questions aren't so cool from the answering end, are they? I suggest considering your wording more carefully the next time you pose one.

1. So will Paizo [be canceled].

2. Depends how long [5e] lasts. Who would say that after 10 years or 15 years?

3. How do you know [5e won't fundamentally fail]? It isn't even out yet. Seems your mind is already made.

1. I assume you mean 'So will paizo go out of business.' While I don't think that's likely to happen anytime soon, PF 2e is most certainly on its way.

2. Ah, what it must be like to be that optimistic...

3. When you've seen as many editions as I have, you start noticing patterns. So as fundamentally disinterested in 5e as I am, I know it's not fundamentally flawed. (At least not in a way that several other editions aren't.) People will buy it for whatever reasons, even if only "Because it's the current edition of D&D," and many will even find themselves loving it. And then its profits will become a diminishing return for WotC, and all of a sudden 6e will be here!

 

[Kramodlog]

That's because you don't see a problem with your favorite edition.

It is not. Seems you are making lots of assumptions.

I've had a paizo forum account for years, and I still post there. If what you're insinuating were true -- that 3.x's issues aren't such a big deal to most D&Ders -- I'd expect the paizo forums to be free of all the debates we saw during the 2000 - 2008 era. (Is LFQW a problem? Should paladins only be LG? How do I deal with alignment? Player entitlement vs. DM god-complex, the list goes on and on.) After all, those who think these issues are problems should have converted to 4e right? Not so! All of these issues are still debated on Paizo, on ENworld, and on every forum where 3.x is discussed -- and just as hotly as ever.

A vocal minority is still a minorty, even if it is vocal. The problem seems to be people rather the system itself. These are maturity problems, social problems. Not mechanic ones. If it were a systemic mechanical problem, well it wouldn't be the most popular RPG around.

Clearly, 4e isn't the solution everyone is looking for.

Everyone or a vocal minority?

It isn't even the solution for everyone who sees problems with 3.x. But it created solutions to problems that are very much present for many D&Ders, regardless of whether you recognize those problems or not.

You are assuming a lot ofe people have these problems. This hasn't been demonstrated.

Leading questions aren't so cool from the answering end, are they? I suggest considering your wording more carefully the next time you pose one.

My wording is correct. Keep you "lessons" for yourself, young man.

1. I assume you mean 'So will paizo go out of business.'

Nope.

PF 2e is most certainly on its way.

PF 2 will happen. When is the question.

2. Ah, what it must be like to be that optimistic...

Assumptions, again. I see a pattern.

3. When you've seen as many editions as I have,

An appeal to authority. Cute.

you start noticing patterns. So as fundamentally disinterested in 5e as I am, I know it's not fundamentally flawed. (At least not in a way that several other editions aren't.)

Without seeing it? That is even cuter!

People will buy it for whatever reasons, even if only "Because it's the current edition of D&D," and many will even find themselves loving it. And then its profits will become a diminishing return for WotC, and all of a sudden 6e will be here!

Oh wow! And me who thought that a magical edition will be made and last for ever.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Having feats is not getting cool and interesting choices?

Seriously. I'll take a feat over a "maneuver" any day.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Seriously. I'll take a feat over a "maneuver" any day.

just let me know when there are feats anywhere near as cool as spells...


Level 9 fighter gets d10hp +1 to hit
Level 9 wizard gets access to 2 5th level spells, but can only prep and cast 1 per day...

 

[Ahnehnois]

just let me know when there are feats anywhere near as cool as spells...

Now.

 

[Greg K]

1
Warlock is the best class 3.5 ever made.

Of course that is your opinion. Not fact.

Book of 9 swords was the beginning of fighters getting more then just feats, if you really like bonus feat fighter then I guess that is why you dislike giving them cool and interesting choices instead.

Liking bonus feats and not Bo9S doesn't mean that one doesn't want to give fighters cool and interesting choices. One can like bonus beats and think that there are better ways than the ToB system to accomplish the goal of allowing fighters to do cool and interesting things.