Pathfinder 1E Where does Pathfinder go from here?

[DaveMage]

I wonder how 5E will play out over the 20 levels.

The thing about D&D prior to 5E and Pathfinder now is that the experience is vastly different at 1st level than at 20th level.

5E seems to be making the experience more similar. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing will certainly be individual taste, but I've very much enjoyed the high level experience more so than the low-level one. I'm not sure 5E will deliver the same sense of character accomplishment that the other editions and Pathfinder does.

The other thing I love about 3.X/Pathfinder are the character & monster options.

While 5E looks like it was built for future character options, they are deliberately dialing down the monster variants (because they don't feel they need them). I'm not sure how I feel about that.

 

[Hannerdyn]

The other thing I love about 3.X/Pathfinder are the character & monster options.

I think this is their primary strength. Though you may be in the minority in enjoying higher-level play, most people I know (this is not scientific, I know) enjoy play between say 3rd and 12th level or so in 3.5 and PF. Even at those levels, combat slows down to a tactical session rather than an RP session that includes some combat. Obviously some groups prefer that, and PF can cater to them, but there is room to simplify.

Whether this happens as a new edition or a different style of play with conversions, I don't know.

 

[randian]

I love the scope and competence of high level characters. I've never understood the enmity towards high level play so many people have.

 

[Hannerdyn]

I love the scope and competence of high level characters. I've never understood the enmity towards high level play so many people have.

I too love the scope and competence of high level characters, I don't care for high level play, where combats can run a half hour per round.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

I too love the scope and competence of high level characters, I don't care for high level play, where combats can run a half hour per round.

I can see that.

Personally I play HERO as my primary game - generally Champions with all options open. With that point of view I tend to scoff as the idea that Pathfinder is too complex or that combats take too long.

 

[Hannerdyn]

I can see that.

Personally I play HERO as my primary game - generally Champions with all options open. With that point of view I tend to scoff as the idea that Pathfinder is too complex or that combats take too long.

Right! I guess the question is if the target demo is of the same opinion.

You Lord Mhoram...

You just may be an outlier.

 

[randian]

I can see that.

Personally I play HERO as my primary game - generally Champions with all options open. With that point of view I tend to scoff as the idea that Pathfinder is too complex or that combats take too long.

I'm a Champions gamer too. Too few of us left. With the proliferation of save or be out effects at high levels PF combats shouldn't take hugely longer. If you're just bashing for HP that's different.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

Right! I guess the question is if the target demo is of the same opinion.

You Lord Mhoram...

You just may be an outlier.

I'm used to it.

I read D&D 5th and did some playtesting before release. I enjoyed it.. but I could never have that as my primary D&D type game... there was nowhere near enough mechanical engagement for me to enjoy. I probably spend twice as much time tinkering with rules, making characters and just enjoying mechanical stuff than I do playing at the table. I know I am not D&D 5th target demographic.

 

[airwalkrr]

IMHO Paizo's strength has been and continues to be the quality of their adventures and "fluff" ideas for players. Their Adventure Paths and Golarion sourcebooks are constant sources of inspiration, even if you don't run pure Pathfinder. The creative minds at Paizo also continue to publish quality game aids like maps, miniatures, and decks which can really enhance the play experience. I also find myself in the camp of those who find Pathfinder and the 3.X architecture too bloated with rules, but I mostly limit my players to the core rulebook and simply cut out swathes of systems which I find burdensome. Thus I see no need to use a lighter rules system like 5e. (Although I admit being pulled towards 5e for nostalgia.) But I continued playing 3.5 for years after both PF and 4e came out. I didn't convert to PF until only a little over a year ago. I expect to continue with PF for many years to come.

 

[Werebat]

I agree, wholeheartedly.

And my axe!