Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Pathfinder RPG: What's To Like?
I'm gonna talk a little bit more about dice & paper RPGing, just 'cuz I can.
The Pathfinder RPG rules have been out a couple of weeks now. While I still haven't had a chance to play the system yet, and still haven't even read through the entire nearly-600-page tome of rules, I've found a lot to like so far.
First of all, the best thing about it is that it is a continuation of Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 edition gaming - particularly since Wizards of the Coast has dropped all support and 3.5 and has even yanked all digital sales of back-product off the market. My bookshelves are overloaded with source material that I still want to use, and from what I can tell it's all still very usable with very little conversion. Way Cool.
But it still has quite a few differences from D&D 3.5, and while I'm not 100% on-board with all changes, most of them seem pretty nice. And while there was definitely some "power creep" that has taken place, it's not too bad.
Some of the overall improvements that I think I'm going to really enjoy include:
- The simplified skill system. No more headaches with half-point cross-class skills. Some skills have been combined into one. Concentration - which was such a mandatory skill for casters that it has been referred to as a "skill tax" - has been done away with in favor of a level check. The revised system allows 90% of the customization and flexibility of the old system, but at less than half the complexity. I love that.
- Sorcerer bloodlines. While it sounds a little bit like they were cribbing from White Wolf's playbook on these, they add a lot to both roleplaying and customization of a character. They sound like fun.
- Vastly improved multiclassing rules. No more XP penalty for non-favored class / imbalanced leveling weirdness.
- Purchased Magic Items - they've virtually done away with large cities being a "mega-mall" for magic items. While very low-value magic items are still readily available in sufficiently large cities, there's no expectations any more of being able to upgrade to a +2 Frost Sword just because the city population is high enough. Instead, a big city is likely to have a limited number of magic items available for sale (above a certain value), determined by the game master. I really, REALLY like this. This puts magic items back in the control of the gamemaster as rewards, and makes the crafting skills much more important.
- Mo' Better Melee Classes - Okay, I don't really think the Fighter class was lacking in power in the older systems. But they weren't all that sexy at higher levels either. The rogue wasn't underpowered, either, but did lack a bit of flexibility and utility at high levels. And the Paladin was pretty useless. That's been addressed. The paladin, in particular, has been turned into an all-out champion butt-kicker of evil. Any demon, devil, evil dragon, or vampire is going to be seriously concerned if they know they are going up against a paladin. The ranger didn't get so much, but the transformation to more of a "special forces" type now includes an option to make them more of a leader, sharing a portion of their favored enemy bonuses to allies.
- Feats - There's more of 'em, more opportunities to take 'em, and some of them now scale with the character so they are less useless at higher levels. I'd say they are much more integral with your character design and customization now. Good stuff!
- The Combat Maneuver Bonus (CMB) and Combat Maneuver Defense (CMD) rules. While I do not think these rules are really significantly more streamlined or simplified over the 3.5 equivalents, I like that there's now one system that unifies them. That makes them easier to handle as a whole.
- Channel Energy - Some people will hate this change, but I love it. The cleric's ability to turn undead was always a problem in every edition of D&D. Undead encounters frequently became either trivial or impossible with very little room in-between depending upon whether or not the party cleric could pull off a turn or destroy. It was too much of an all-or-nothing effect. The new rule not only solves that problem, but it also gives (good) clerics more access to healing so they can use their spell slots for other things occasionally.
Labels: Roleplaying Games
- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 7:41 AM (Permalink)
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
Hmm, it seems a little better, but still sounds like it's D&D, i.e. a scattered pile of disparate, non-intuitive rules. (That will just need to be tossed and replaced by house rules that make sense.)
I think I'll pass. =\
I think I'll pass. =\
In a big city, you *should* be able to get your hands on almost any magic item (barring ultra-rare stuff of course) -- but you can't expect any particular vendor to have everything on hand. They could probably order something in for you though, but it might take months to arrive from another city (and there's always the danger of bandits intercepting it -- which offers some interesting quest possibilities).
This puts magic items back in the control of the gamemaster as rewards, and makes the crafting skills much more important.
I don't know about pen-and-paper play, which I've never had the opportunity to do (some PBEM, years ago), but I really dislike the crafting skills in computer RPGs. If you can make anything you want, where's the anticipation in finding treasure?
To me, loot is a big part of exploration and discovery, and crafting skills seem to ruin that. It's power gaming run amok, don't you think? Why should you be able to make - or even purchase - EXACTLY the perfect item to fit your character? I like the randomness of loot much better.
I don't have the background to comment on the rest of the post, though it's quite interesting.
I don't know about pen-and-paper play, which I've never had the opportunity to do (some PBEM, years ago), but I really dislike the crafting skills in computer RPGs. If you can make anything you want, where's the anticipation in finding treasure?
To me, loot is a big part of exploration and discovery, and crafting skills seem to ruin that. It's power gaming run amok, don't you think? Why should you be able to make - or even purchase - EXACTLY the perfect item to fit your character? I like the randomness of loot much better.
I don't have the background to comment on the rest of the post, though it's quite interesting.
@xenovore: Have you played third edition rules (even via Neverwinter Nights or Temple of Elemental Evil)? They are a LOT more organized and unified than previous editions. And Pathfinder takes it a little bit further. The downside of that is that they aren't as modular as they were in the old days - they are too interdependent.
@Miral: That's frequently how I've tried to play it in 3.5. You may not find an item available, but you may get some leads on an item (which probably involve a quest of some kind). I've also played it that magic item manufacture may require the acquisition of some rare items that requires questing. Of course, I *broke the rules* by doing that... But the players knew that going in.
@WCG - I've gotten used to the idea. In third edition, the ability to scribe your own scrolls is pretty essential. I've taken some initiative and required that players may have to seek out some rare materials in some cases (mainly for weapons, armor, and miscellaneous items) to craft. But the expense (including XP cost - which doesn't exist in Pathfinder) was usually prohibitive enough to prevent players from creating everything their hearts desired. Not even close.
@Miral: That's frequently how I've tried to play it in 3.5. You may not find an item available, but you may get some leads on an item (which probably involve a quest of some kind). I've also played it that magic item manufacture may require the acquisition of some rare items that requires questing. Of course, I *broke the rules* by doing that... But the players knew that going in.
@WCG - I've gotten used to the idea. In third edition, the ability to scribe your own scrolls is pretty essential. I've taken some initiative and required that players may have to seek out some rare materials in some cases (mainly for weapons, armor, and miscellaneous items) to craft. But the expense (including XP cost - which doesn't exist in Pathfinder) was usually prohibitive enough to prevent players from creating everything their hearts desired. Not even close.
I think giving the game master control over magic items is like giving him control over what feats you get. It's their character. Let them pick what they want.
As an analogy, when someone gets 10,000 XP, you generally don't tell them "There's no one who can train you to be a rogue in this town." But when they get 10,000 GP, realism intrudes. You have to think of GP as a character advancement reward more than a literal pile of gold you have to haul to a store somewhere.
As an analogy, when someone gets 10,000 XP, you generally don't tell them "There's no one who can train you to be a rogue in this town." But when they get 10,000 GP, realism intrudes. You have to think of GP as a character advancement reward more than a literal pile of gold you have to haul to a store somewhere.
@Noumenon - I'm gonna disagree with ya here. XP and GP are boring, generic rewards. Magic items are really *the* thrill of discovery in a D&D-style RPG. I mean, look at Diablo 2. What kept me playing again and again, facing the same enemies over and over? It wasn't the excitement of seeing new random terrain configurations. It was all about what magical treasure I might discover. Yeah, leveling up was cool, too, but after level 30 there really wasn't anything super-awesome to look forward to beyond magic items.
But finding something new and cool that you could use - that was always thrilling.
I think crafting (and, to a lesser degree, purchasing) magic items is a way to cover weaknesses in your equipment due to luck-of-the-draw (even if treasure is non-random, you might still miss it, or lose out to someone else in your party who can also use it). And certain items like lower-level scrolls and potions really are more commodities than magical items in traditional fantasy RPGs (and the combats and classes are balanced around their assumed availability).
But I think crafted / purchased magical gear should play a very secondary role to found items.
But finding something new and cool that you could use - that was always thrilling.
I think crafting (and, to a lesser degree, purchasing) magic items is a way to cover weaknesses in your equipment due to luck-of-the-draw (even if treasure is non-random, you might still miss it, or lose out to someone else in your party who can also use it). And certain items like lower-level scrolls and potions really are more commodities than magical items in traditional fantasy RPGs (and the combats and classes are balanced around their assumed availability).
But I think crafted / purchased magical gear should play a very secondary role to found items.
There are certainly a great many things to like about the new system, but I'd say there are some things that still need to be ironed out and rebalanced.
The ranger and barbarian are a little weak compared to the fighter and paladin. For instance, the ranger's favored enemies, a significant class ability, relies too much on the DM working around it, and throwing that type of enemy at the party occasionally. Plus, several options have a very narrow level range. How often do you fight goblinoids and orcs after level 5? Do you fight enough dragons before level 8 to make it worthwhile early? Unless the DM creates some special enemies (or there's some new enemies in the Monster Manual, as I haven't seen it), many picks are a waste after several levels or aren't particularly useful until higher levels.
While some of the barbarian rage powers are ok, many are a little lackluster. The class receives them at the same frequency as a fighter gains bonus combat feats. Granted, the barbarian does gain a few extra benefits over the fighter (although the fighter eventually gains some similar abilities), but for the most part, a combat feat is a clear winner in almost every case.
The cleric's new class ability, Channel Energy, is pretty awesome. Unfortunately, the paladin's Lay on Hands ability is better in every way. The number of uses per day increases as they gain levels (the cleric's uses are static), its more versatile, especially with Mercies, and at level 20, the paladin heals the maximum amount possible. Considering the paladin is already such a powerhouse, and has several other significant class abilities compared to the cleric's one, it just seems odd.
All of this isn't to say I don't like the new system, because I do. But there are probably a few changes I would make.
The ranger and barbarian are a little weak compared to the fighter and paladin. For instance, the ranger's favored enemies, a significant class ability, relies too much on the DM working around it, and throwing that type of enemy at the party occasionally. Plus, several options have a very narrow level range. How often do you fight goblinoids and orcs after level 5? Do you fight enough dragons before level 8 to make it worthwhile early? Unless the DM creates some special enemies (or there's some new enemies in the Monster Manual, as I haven't seen it), many picks are a waste after several levels or aren't particularly useful until higher levels.
While some of the barbarian rage powers are ok, many are a little lackluster. The class receives them at the same frequency as a fighter gains bonus combat feats. Granted, the barbarian does gain a few extra benefits over the fighter (although the fighter eventually gains some similar abilities), but for the most part, a combat feat is a clear winner in almost every case.
The cleric's new class ability, Channel Energy, is pretty awesome. Unfortunately, the paladin's Lay on Hands ability is better in every way. The number of uses per day increases as they gain levels (the cleric's uses are static), its more versatile, especially with Mercies, and at level 20, the paladin heals the maximum amount possible. Considering the paladin is already such a powerhouse, and has several other significant class abilities compared to the cleric's one, it just seems odd.
All of this isn't to say I don't like the new system, because I do. But there are probably a few changes I would make.
# posted by 
: September 16, 2009 9:18 AM
: September 16, 2009 9:18 AM
@ Rampant Coyote: Yes, I have played 3rd edition, up to 3.5 actually. But, while 3rd edition was certainly an improvement over the previous editions, it was still a mess, IMO. I always felt (and still do) that I was required to memorize the entire Players Manual in order to actually be able to enjoy the game (especially when playing a caster). I mean, every play session, it seemed like at least 50% of the time was spent looking up rules, rather than playing (and I wasn't the only one with that issue).
I think I've just been spoiled by better systems; systems that don't require a dedicated Rules Nazi and don't get in the way of the role playing. Systems without so many different dice! =)
Inevitably, whenever I try to play D&D in its various incarnations (including 4th edition), I end up thinking, "Man, I wish we were using a system that didn't suck! Then this would be way more fun..."
Post a Comment
I think I've just been spoiled by better systems; systems that don't require a dedicated Rules Nazi and don't get in the way of the role playing. Systems without so many different dice! =)
Inevitably, whenever I try to play D&D in its various incarnations (including 4th edition), I end up thinking, "Man, I wish we were using a system that didn't suck! Then this would be way more fun..."
Links to this post:
<< Home
