Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 7638916" data-attributes="member: 3400">This is pretty much a big load of baloney and largely based on a badly misinterpreted article by Monte Cook. WotC did not include trap options in 3.5, nor does Paizo include them in Pathfinder. There are options that work for some purposes, styles of play, styles of campaigns, that don't work for others. The trick isn't to &quot;avoid the traps&quot; as much as figure out which ones work right for your own campaigns and the styles of play you prefer. The classic example that Monte Cook used was the toughness feat - which frankly sucked for PCs, but was perfectly reasonable for the DM to use in NPC creation. It wasn't a &quot;trap&quot; option or a Timmy card - it was a tool useful for certain contexts - not so much for others. Cook lamented that they didn't put enough effort into explaining those contexts because they led to people thinking they were traps... when they were not.And, honestly, Core only PFS is fairly popular, even with more recent seasons. Core exists, in no small part, to keep the complexity down to a more manageable level by limiting the number of resources involved. PFS scenarios don't require or expect PCs from more recent rulebooks in order to be successful.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="billd91, post: 7638916, member: 3400"] This is pretty much a big load of baloney and largely based on a badly misinterpreted article by Monte Cook. WotC did [b]not[/b] include trap options in 3.5, nor does Paizo include them in Pathfinder. There are options that work for some purposes, styles of play, styles of campaigns, that don't work for others. The trick isn't to "avoid the traps" as much as figure out which ones work right for your own campaigns and the styles of play you prefer. The classic example that Monte Cook used was the toughness feat - which frankly sucked for PCs, but was perfectly reasonable for the DM to use in NPC creation. It wasn't a "trap" option or a Timmy card - it was a tool useful for certain contexts - not so much for others. Cook lamented that they didn't put enough effort into explaining those contexts because they led to people thinking they were traps... when they were not. And, honestly, Core only PFS is fairly popular, even with more recent seasons. Core exists, in no small part, to keep the complexity down to a more manageable level by limiting the number of resources involved. PFS scenarios don't require or expect PCs from more recent rulebooks in order to be successful. [/QUOTE]

Verification