Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder Alpha "crunch" discussion

[Voadam]

No, if you have an across the board change then this is simply the "new" 9th level and they receive XP exactly as if they were 9th level characters completing a 9th level adventure.

Putting 9th level + free LA +1 characters in a 10th level adventure has a few more mechanical implications.

They would have the suggested starting character wealth of 9th level characters instead of 10th.

How would they get the xp of completing a 9th level adventure? They would be facing 10th level challenges and gaining more xp for them than their actually LA +1 ECL 10 comparison characters would and needing fewer xp to advance. To get 9th level xp you have to change how you get xp.

They would gain the gp and magic rewards balanced for 10th level characters.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

For all who missed it, the first feedback has been incorporated into an "Alpha 1.1" document, ready for download on the Paizo homepage. They also have the changes as "Developer's Notes #1" for download, for those who don't want to slog through a new 65-pages pdf. No changes to the skill system (reworked for DN #2), but changes to Feats and other stuff.

 

[BryonD]

Putting 9th level + free LA +1 characters in a 10th level adventure has a few more mechanical implications.

None that in any way reduce compatibility.

They would have the suggested starting character wealth of 9th level characters instead of 10th.

Suggested by who? Who says that the PF wealth expectations must be the same as the D&D expectations?

How would they get the xp of completing a 9th level adventure? They would be facing 10th level challenges and gaining more xp for them than their actually LA +1 ECL 10 comparison characters would and needing fewer xp to advance. To get 9th level xp you have to change how you get xp.

Nope. They would be facing 9th level PF challenges.

They would gain the gp and magic rewards balanced for 10th level characters.

Nope. They would receive the gp and magic rewards for 9th level PF characters.

The problems you are talking about do not even exist because we are not talking about D&D characters. But even if they did they would simply change the balance, which would have zero impact on compatibility.

 

[BryonD]

Putting 9th level + free LA +1 characters in a 10th level adventure has a few more mechanical implications.

Again, a critical point here is it is not a free +1 LA. It is a different baseline across the board. This distinction is very important.

 

[kinem]

That is a big difference. I do see any intention of mixing "core" and PF PCs. If you did you would need to deal with the adjustement. Though, honestly, the difference in power there evolves over levels and would be an even bigger pain than different base race powers.
Using a PF Wizard alongside a core Wizard would be a mistake and I've seen nothing to suggest that intent. Quite the opposite.
PF will replace the existing core. No problem.

I could certainly see a player wanting to keep his old changeling warlock or whatever, while other players use the PF races and classes which currently have a quite limited selection.

 

[BryonD]

I could certainly see a player wanting to keep his old changeling warlock or whatever, while other players use the PF races and classes which currently have a quite limited selection.

Then the best solution would be to give that character something else to bring it up to par. But that doesn't change any of my points.

 

[Voadam]

None that in any way reduce compatibility.

Suggested by who? Who says that the PF wealth expectations must be the same as the D&D expectations?

Nope. They would be facing 9th level PF challenges.

Nope. They would receive the gp and magic rewards for 9th level PF characters.

The problems you are talking about do not even exist because we are not talking about D&D characters. But even if they did they would simply change the balance, which would have zero impact on compatibility.

I think you've lost track of the discussion you were participating in a little bit. I was responding to your comment in post 175 which was responding to Kinem's post 173 in which he said

Sure it would. Old module says 10th level PCs? Send in 9th level PF PCs. Give XP, level advancement as per ECL 10 PCs.

We're talking about an old 3.5 module for level 10 adventurers using 9th level PF characters.

The old module assumes they have level 10 wealth out of the 3.5 DMG. It is possible PF will bump up expected wealth a level compared to 3.5 but we don't know that yet.

They are facing D&D adversaries designed for level 10 D&D players. There may be conversion mechanics adjusting how CR and party level interact in PF so that the same encounters for a 10th level D&D party will result in the same proportion of advancement of a 9th level PF party, but that is highly speculative at this point.

They would receive the gp and magic rewards suggested for a 9th level PF party only if PF bumps up the expected gp and magic rewards by a level.

I agree with your point that if everything is set to the new increased power balance point then you can skip LA effects on xp and wealth and have everything be balanced.

I'm not arguing with your technical distinction between compatible and balanced.

I am saying that using older materials will have mechanical implications because of the different power baselines.

As written now, assuming the PF characters are taking on 3.5 modules designed for 3.5 characters one level higher and using 3.5 rules that PF has not changed, they will gain more xp from those challenges than the higher level 3.5 characters get, need less xp to advance levels, and the same loot as the higher level 3.5 characters.

Until we see the PF changes, if any, on wealth and xp then saying the 10th level 3.5 module will give 9th level PF characters the same challenges, advancement, and loot as a 9th level standard PF module is speculative at best.

 

[Remus Lupin]

I dunno, I think, having followed this discussion for several pages, that people are getting worked up over very minor issues. The issue is compatibility. I was initially concerned that the power bump would adversely affect the backward compatibility issue, but the more I read and listen and think the less it bugs me. There's never going to be complete compatibility, and if you want/need/desire that, you should definitely stick with 3.X. But if Pathfinder is "good enough" to let me run, say "Forge of Fury" with PF characters without feeling like A) they blew my doors off, and B) it wasn't fun, then I'll be happy. If not, I'll stick with 3.X.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

just to let ya know pathfinder has been downloaded over 10'000 times this week.
oh and they new changes are good i like em. hope they keep the alpha skills though

 

[Banshee16]

Did anyone else have their anti-virus detect a Trojan Downloader embedded in the revised alpha copy of the rules that were uploaded to the Paizo site tonight? I'm not sure if AVG was being over-cautious, or if there was an issue..

Banshee