Pathfinder 1E Monte Cook joins Pathfinder team

[Xanaqui]

Another backwards compatible aspect is when they make their PF modules designed for the PF level of PC power. Paizo 3.5 adventures have a rep for being very tough for the suggested levels as is. Bump them up for PF default and a group using 3.5 core only and just looking for continued Dungeon style adventures will get more chewed up than they did in Age of Worms.

I don't think that it's that difficult to bump up your player's level if you think they're having too much trouble at the present one.

 

[BryonD]

Nice marketing move on Paizo's part. And that's about all it really is, a marketing move.

I think you are greatly underrating the value of quality feedback.
I'd say calling this nothing more than marketing would be as wrong as it would be to say PF is now a Monte Cook product. Neither of those positions are a good description of the situation as currently explained.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Reading this thread makes me wonder...

How far will Pathfinder have to go before it is a sub-game like Iron Kingdoms and such and not really 3.5 at all.

Personally I think they have crossed that line already.

I am willing to grant that there is the possibility that it might become popular enough to supplement 3.5, but I see that chance as pretty slim.

I find the line very hard to draw. Arcana Unearthed/Evolved offered several new classes, a new magic system, and new types of feats, and new races. Still I am pretty convinced that it is mostly balanced with ordinary 3.0/3.5 material, and I could run a 3.5 Fighter alongside with a AE Warmain. And I sure could give the Warmain the Ronin PrC or the Eldritch Knight PrC if I wanted too, and not run in serious problems.

These are entirely new core classes, and the "compatibility" goal surely wasn't as high as for Pathfinder. Pathfinder is keeping all the existing classes, but adding some stuff to them. Is it compatible with AE? Is it compatible with the Complete Warrior material? In what way is it compatible, and in what ways is it not?
But that's just the Alpha state - how will this change?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I think you are greatly underrating the value of quality feedback.
I'd say calling this nothing more than marketing would be as wrong as it would be to say PF is now a Monte Cook product. Neither of those positions are a good description of the situation as currently explained.

In the end, it's both.* A marketing move, and a good source for quality feedback. Monte was part in creating the system, and he modified it heavily (Arcana Unearthed, then working with Mearls to create IH). I think he'll know what to look for when making changes.

*
Like so many things... 4E is WotC attempt to make money, but also an attempt to create a good system. Which of these aspects succeed remains to be seen...

 

[Tharen the Damned]

For all those who fear that Pathfinder RPG will not be compatible enough with 3.5, especially Non Core 3.5 Classes, Feats etc.:
1) Do a playtest with PRPG Classes and Non Core Classes (said Beguiler maybe)
2) Write down zyour experience
3) Post it on the Pathfinder RPG Playtest boards.
PFRPG after all is a big open playtest. And I think the Paizi team really appreciates every input they can get.

Regarding Monte and Pathfinder: Monte Cook is arguably one of the D&D celebrities, therefore it is a good marketing move. But Monte also is a good game designer. His 3.0 credits, his Books of Eldritch Might and his Arcana Unearthed/Evolved Books show that he knows how the game works. It is always good to have someone who gives his opinion.

By the way, Wolfgang Baur, Ed Greenwod and Keith Baker contribute to the Pathfinder CAMPAIGN Setting. That is also a good marketing move. But Wolfgang, Ed and Keith also have some worldbuilding experience which undoubtly helps in a Campaign setting book.

 

[Voadam]

I don't think that it's that difficult to bump up your player's level if you think they're having too much trouble at the present one.

In the middle of a module?

You can hold them off until they are higher level than the module says it is designed for.

You can design characters to be more powerful with higher wealth, point buy, gestalt options, powerful classes, free LA, etc.

You can pump them up in an ongoing game by giving out more loot, having NPCs join in, or pumping them up with a template or such.

You could arbitrarily bump them up a level to handle the module.

I would argue that most of these types of things are not easy to do in the middle of an ongoing adventure where PCs are mechanically in over their heads, nor is it desirable to do so.

You can cut down the opposition by weakening the fights, but then if you do this part way through the adventure the climax fight gets watered down and can seem incongruent with the earlier parts.

 

[BryonD]

In the end, it's both.* A marketing move, and a good source for quality feedback. Monte was part in creating the system, and he modified it heavily (Arcana Unearthed, then working with Mearls to create IH). I think he'll know what to look for when making changes.

Oh I agree 100%. It is an excellent marketing move. I was just disputing that it was nothing more than that.

 

[BryonD]

I would argue that most of these types of things are not easy to do in the middle of an ongoing adventure where PCs are mechanically in over their heads, nor is it desirable to do so.

Just speaking for myself, I don't see this problem ever happening.
For starters, the difference in power level just isn't that big.
Its just not.

Second, it isn't hard to look at an adventure and look at a party and know if they are in the same band or not.

 

[Xanaqui]

In the middle of a module?

You could arbitrarily bump them up a level to handle the module.

Yep. Perhaps you have difficulty with the idea of "I just killed that Choker 6 seconds ago! Now I can finally speak fluent Kobold!"

I have no problem with this approach. For that matter, during my first 3e game, I really had PCs leveling in the midst of combat. It was quite a change from using 1st ed training rules (which is what I used in my campaign before that).

 

[Nellisir]

I would argue that most of these types of things are not easy to do in the middle of an ongoing adventure where PCs are mechanically in over their heads, nor is it desirable to do so.
You can cut down the opposition by weakening the fights, but then if you do this part way through the adventure the climax fight gets watered down and can seem incongruent with the earlier parts.

How exactly is a module going to suddenly become "Pathfinder" in the middle? Wouldn't it be either a 3.5 module or a Pathfinder module? Is this a new upgrade feature - when Pathfinder is released, all Paizo modules in existence will automatically become Pathfinder modules? 'Cause if so, that's pretty neat.

Seriously, campaigns have breaks (between adventures, for instance). Throw in an extra adventure - I mean, if you're inserting 3.5 characters into a PF campaign in the middle, you're already adapting it. If you're running 3.5 characters in PF campaign from the beginning, start them at 1 or 2 levels higher than recommended and see how it works.

I just don't see this is a serious issue. I mean, even if you somehow "go Pathfinder" in the middle of an adventure and the party is outclassed and you -really- can't think of a solution, it's a one-time fix. You don't have to add another level every week.