Pathfinder 1E Monte Cook joins Pathfinder team

[Wulf Ratbane]

It doesn't need to be "Monte coming out of retirement to write Pathfinder" to be really good news.

Nope, it just needs to be this:

So what exactly is happening? Paizo makes a big marketing announcement that they've got one of the fathers of 3rd edition D&D on board as a consultant.

That's sufficient.

 

[SSquirrel]

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?

The only thing you needed to do to run core classes alongside AE classes was add a n extra feat to core classes and keep the magic systems separate. That is way more compatible with the game's power level than having all the same core classes turned up to 11 IMO. Part of my joy in AU/AE was the fact that it was all new races and classes, something new was very fun.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The only thing you needed to do to run core classes alongside AE classes was add a n extra feat to core classes and keep the magic systems separate. That is way more compatible with the game's power level than having all the same core classes turned up to 11 IMO. Part of my joy in AU/AE was the fact that it was all new races and classes, something new was very fun.

Even if Pathfinder does just turn the power level to 11, they are still adding new stuff. I think that can still be fun.

But, as a 4E fanboi, here my criticism:
It can be fun, at least for a while. The question is what happens if I want to pull out some "old" 3.5 PrCs or core classes and want to use them - they might still be new (I have used only a small subset of them so far), but if they are weaker then the core 3PF classes? Do I have to tweak each of them? Do I have to buy the PF equivalents, and still throwing away my 3.5 books (which a 3.5/PF supporter might not have wanted?)

 

[BryonD]

Example?

There is a wide range of PClasses out there with respect to balance.
Unless it was already way underpowered, I can't think of one that would have a playability problem.

As SSquirrel said, if it comes out a bit short, give them one more bonus feat. Done. The change just isn't that big.

 

[catsclaw227]

Even if Pathfinder does just turn the power level to 11, they are still adding new stuff. I think that can still be fun.

This.

But, as a 4E fanboi, here my criticism:
It can be fun, at least for a while. The question is what happens if I want to pull out some "old" 3.5 PrCs or core classes and want to use them - they might still be new (I have used only a small subset of them so far), but if they are weaker then the core 3PF classes? Do I have to tweak each of them? Do I have to buy the PF equivalents, and still throwing away my 3.5 books (which a 3.5/PF supporter might not have wanted?)

But not necessarily this...

I usually agree with you Mustrum, especially on 4e (we have similar likes and dislikes). But I am starting to be sold on the idea that I can replace my 3.5 core classes with Pathfinder, use my Bo9S classes, my PHB II classes (with a couple of power tweaks, like maybe give the classed a couple extra feats and 1st level HP) and be good with it.

I am going 4e, but playing in a PRPG game might be really fun now too. YMMV.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Example?

Loremaster PrC. If I no longer gain my Pathfinder Diviner special abilities, what would be the point of becoming Loremaster?
Ronin PrC. I can play a Fighter with more plusses to hit and damage, or a PrC that gives me some charge bonus and a tiny bit of sneak attack.
Warlock Base Class. yes, he can still go on forever, unlike the Pathfinder spellcasters. But compare him to an Evoker Wizard (let's not talk about the Sorcerer in Alpha 2. Normally I'd compare to him, but he is clearly not finished or balanced yet). The Evoker Wizard can cast several extra magic missiles now. Sure, it's a far cry from at-will, but he didn't lose much for this, and he still has his usual array of spells. The Warlock will work fine if you throw a lot of equal level encounters at him. But beware the more challenging encounters - the Evoker has some extra resources to spend here the Warlock just doesn't have. Fireballs, Disintegrates, Chain Lightnings. The fundamental problem of the Warlock remains (inability to "spike" in high threat encounters, and a low versatility), but the Wizards fundamental problem (to few spells to spare in normal encounters) is lessened.

There is a wide range of PClasses out there with respect to balance.
Unless it was already way underpowered, I can't think of one that would have a playability problem.

As SSquirrel said, if it comes out a bit short, give them one more bonus feat. Done. The change just isn't that big.

Maybe both classes are underpowered. But they are classes I always felt tempted to play.
I think most people would say that Loremaster was "overpowered", strictly speaking, but not in a game balance altering way. The Pathfinder Diviner is definitely better then this.

You might say the differences are small, but I just disagree. A potential +3 to-hit & damage difference between a Fighter and a Fighter/Ronin is just not small anymore. If you think otherwise, then this is something we will never be able to agree on, and it explains why I prefer the idea of 4E over Pathfinder.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I am going 4e, but playing in a PRPG game might be really fun now too.

Don't disagree with this.

 

[BryonD]

Loremaster PrC. If I no longer gain my Pathfinder Diviner special abilities, what would be the point of becoming Loremaster?
Ronin PrC. I can play a Fighter with more plusses to hit and damage, or a PrC that gives me some charge bonus and a tiny bit of sneak attack.
Warlock Base Class. yes, he can still go on forever, unlike the Pathfinder spellcasters. But compare him to an Evoker Wizard (let's not talk about the Sorcerer in Alpha 2. Normally I'd compare to him, but he is clearly not finished or balanced yet). The Evoker Wizard can cast several extra magic missiles now. Sure, it's a far cry from at-will, but he didn't lose much for this, and he still has his usual array of spells. The Warlock will work fine if you throw a lot of equal level encounters at him. But beware the more challenging encounters - the Evoker has some extra resources to spend here the Warlock just doesn't have. Fireballs, Disintegrates, Chain Lightnings. The fundamental problem of the Warlock remains (inability to "spike" in high threat encounters, and a low versatility), but the Wizards fundamental problem (to few spells to spare in normal encounters) is lessened.


Maybe both classes are underpowered. But they are classes I always felt tempted to play.
I think most people would say that Loremaster was "overpowered", strictly speaking, but not in a game balance altering way. The Pathfinder Diviner is definitely better then this.

You might say the differences are small, but I just disagree. A potential +3 to-hit & damage difference between a Fighter and a Fighter/Ronin is just not small anymore. If you think otherwise, then this is something we will never be able to agree on, and it explains why I prefer the idea of 4E over Pathfinder.

You have hit on bits of two things. First, the PClasses you have mentioned are known for being weak already. Just as big a difference could be achieved in a 3.5 game depending on alternative class selections. Or at least more than close enough that the "add a feat and move on" solution would be fully adequate.

I think you are greatly under rating the warlock's eldritch blast. So I dispute that one.

But I'd also say you are touching on an area of redundancy. In order to be a "true" diviner you had to take a PClass, with Loremaster being the first choice. (And it was still underpowered). Why? It makes a lot more sense for a diviner to be a great diviner. So the Loremaster gets his space crowded. But that isn't remotely an incompatibility, it is simply options. If you prefer to flavor of the loremaster, then it still works perfectly fine. Underpowered, as it already was, but like I said, "add a feat and move on".

I think that last item ties in to your last comment in reverse. You are bringing up issue that don't even cause a one second hesitation to me. I'm completely comfortable with a game that gives me the tools, freedom and expectation to tune the system to taste. And the difference I see in PF is smaller than some of the tweaks and 3P stuff I've been adapting into my game for years. Very minor balance issues that are easy to adjust? Yeah. "Compatibility" issues? Not remotely.

Making little bumps here and there to keep things in the same band is easy to me and a feature, not a bug. It has literally been in the dozens of times now that I have shook my head and chuckled when someone defended 4E because it was great for "lazy DMs". I prefer a game that gives DMs more freedom and responsibility over a game that supports "lazy DMs" and that (in part) explains why I prefer a game like 3X/PF over 4E.

And honestly, we are talking about PF here. WotC and PF should both be quite interested in what each of us think about their systems. But at the end of the day, WotC should apply a lot more weight to your views than mine when thinking about 4E. You are in their target audience. I'm not. But we are not talking about 4E. We are talking about PF.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

You have hit on bits of two things. First, the PClasses you have mentioned are known for being weak already. Just as big a difference could be achieved in a 3.5 game depending on alternative class selections. Or at least more than close enough that the "add a feat and move on" solution would be fully adequate.

I think you are greatly under rating the warlock's eldritch blast. So I dispute that one.

Well, my play experience is that it is very useful (even if a bit bland ), but the inability to "spike" your damage and hit more dangerous targets stronger or clear "mooks" are a concern for playability, and definitely areas where a "real" spellcaster just shines. Whereas you don't really need yet another "always-on" character - Non-Spellcasters do that fine already...

And honestly, we are talking about PF here. WotC and PF should both be quite interested in what each of us think about their systems. But at the end of the day, WotC should apply a lot more weight to your views than mine when thinking about 4E. You are in their target audience. I'm not. But we are not talking about 4E. We are talking about PF.

Yes, you might be right. Though in an ideal world, we both should be in the respective target audiences.

 

[BryonD]

Well, my play experience is that it is very useful (even if a bit bland ), but the inability to "spike" your damage and hit more dangerous targets stronger or clear "mooks" are a concern for playability, and definitely areas where a "real" spellcaster just shines. Whereas you don't really need yet another "always-on" character - Non-Spellcasters do that fine already...

It is a whole lot better than a few extra magic missles. (and rather bland)

Yes, you might be right. Though in an ideal world, we both should be in the respective target audiences.

Not really. Clearly there are different people with different preferences. Better to make two games and offer more people what they want.

Though I suppose if we are talking about an ideal world, then everyone would realize I'm right and we'd all be in the target audience together. lol

Anyway, we seem to be drifting distinctly off-topic. Clearly PF is in Monte's wheelhouse and his contributions, even the small ones, will be valuable. And the people his ideas will be most valuable to will be the people already more interested in PF. So it works out right.