Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SamuraiJack

Pathfinder Version 2

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, SamuraiJack said:

Pathfinder was a result of WOTC invalidating the OGL and demanding a much stricter set of rules and money to make content for 4E.  Paizo pulling the OGL would really go against one of the reasons they started on '3.75'

I entirely agree - I am just being paranoid about teh stoopid. (I honestly would not have thought WotC was stupid enough to do some of the things that led to 4e going Hindenburg, but they proved me wrong. As I said, sometimes... stupid just happens.)

 

And game relaunches seems prime real estate for growing a fresh crop of stupid. (Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay - 3rd edition. New World of Darkness. D&D 4e. Paranoia 3rd edition.)

 

The Auld Grump

Edited by TheAuldGrump

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a player & purchaser of Pathfinder products I will not be buying into 2e. I'll probably get the main book but other then that I'll prob hold off. I've invested allot of money into dead tree & pdfs & I really don't want to do it again. When Pathfinder first came out I was psyched as I loved what Paizo was putting out with Dragon & Dungeon magazines (Savage Tide, probably one of my all time favorite campaigns) so I went all in when Pathfinder came out. Heck I even got the playtest stuff printed up & bound. Also I became a Charter Superscriber on their forum (ie bought everything). Eventually I had to cut back to just a couple things & then finally I went just with the Adventure Path book(s). About 3 or 4 months ago I stopped getting that. Since I have quite a collection of pdfs I'm in the initial stages of selling off the dead tree books. I guess I better get on that before 2e becomes the norm.

 

I've invested quite a bit into Hero Lab as well. I think one of the reasons why I won't go 2e is D&D 5e has emerged as my favorite system to play right now & it shows in what games I run at ReaperCon now. We Be Goblins games are the only Pathfinder games I run & I'm not gonna update just to run 2e.

 

I wish them luck & hopefully we as gamers aren't subject to anther round of "Edition Wars". Play what makes you happy!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you boil it down, any ruleset is fine as long as you have a party that enjoys using it.  we play pathfinder but we borrow from other systems as well and we have our home rules as well.  we know each other and play within the rules but we may flex or bend to ensure the storyline stays where we want it to.  the important thing is to have fun and enjoy.  I have been playing RPGs since our only option was 2 white books and a Skeleton was new and scary.  I like the skills in pathfinder because it allows for some handwaving when someone is weak in a skill that their character has and it allows them to be the hero and live out a fantasy they could never do on their own Feats allow for some customization but need to be kept in check or the players can stack them to become godlike and that also can take the fun out of a campaign

 

I probably wont go to version 2, although I may borrow from it.  I have more than a lifetimes worth of resources for v1 and really see no need to change.  I never even learned D&D v 4 or 5, though I hear 5 has some good aspects.  It just doesn't add anything to my play style. I am here to tell a story with my friends.  we have a ruleset to provide boundaries and provide a common worldview.  too many rulesets really just detract from the gameflow and I haven't seen one set yet that was absolutely better than any other (although DnD version 4 is about the driest and generic of them) so I am not really sure why everyone gets in such and uproar.  it is what it is and you find a system or three that suit your needs.    Pathfinder v1 is that system for me for fantasy (and traveller for space opera, and 7th sea for swashbuckling and Numenara for far future.)  I may have to learn the occasional system to play in a competition or because one of my friends wants to try something, but these are where I go when I go "home"

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TheAuldGrump said:

Paranoia 3rd edition

Referencing unproducts is treason!

 

But seriously, I’ve not played much Pathfinder, but what I did was all combat - one encounter took three hours to resolve. It was not fun. If this is remedied I may be interested.

 

in the other hand, we may have simply had a terrible DM for that game...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, combat indeed can be very drawn out in the 3.x system, especially at higher levels. Fiddling with the economy of actions is something on which I think most everyone, outside perhaps the hardcore power-gamers and mathematicians, would agree is a worthy idea, all things being equal.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sometimes feel like I might as well be playing calculus master when it comes to keeping track of my bonuses. 

 

“Ok... I’m normally +5 damage, but I’m using a two handed weapon, so x1.5, then power attack adds +6, then the creature is larger +1, and I’m enlarged, and +2 for bulls strength, and bless another +1, and then bardic performance +1, oh wait bless isn’t +1 on damage just to hit and fear effects...

 

wait where was I again? Ok I’m usually +5 on damage, I’m wieldingmy weapon.... “ 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, SamuraiJack said:

the system does need work, but they also need to slow down their release schedule and work on balancing new content more.. the monthly books are hit or miss on content quality these days.. they have core mechanics like DR, then create a bunch of class powers that totally ignore DR and half of the other monster defenses.. Eidolons with a 50% miss chance like incorporeal undead at 7th level.. and their old APs can't keep up with the power creep.. 

 

Oh yea, their release schedule is crazy. At least 1 single adventure module per month, one adventure path module per month, one gazetteer book per month, one player option book per month, and a hardcover book every 3-4 months. It's basically TSR-level oversaturation. Considering that APs, gazetteers, and player option books all contain new rules, not to mention the new stuff in the hardcovers, there's no way that they're able to properly test and review everything new. Which is how you get all sorts of broken combos. And it's a part of the reason why I would never want to ever play in PFS, where basically anything published by Paizo is fair game no matter how broken it may be.

 

11 hours ago, kristof65 said:

to be fair, that's been a problem with D&D in general for a _lot_ of years.  There have been many other rulesets that don't have such complicated character generation and advancement, such as Savage Worlds and Warhammer FRP. And then there are ones that are worse (looking at you, GURPS).

 

I set out to create a character in GURPS once, when I was trying to teach myself the game so that I could then teach my friends and run a Neuromancer-style cyberpunk campaign. I set my point limit, I followed the directions, and then at the end I wanted to see if everything was still under the point limit so I went back through and did the math. It was almost double! So I tried again, making sure to triple check everything as I did it. And I ended up with the same things! And both times it took me like 2 hours to do just the generation portion. The idea that I could do anything I wanted with GURPS was great. Especially considering that they had sourcebooks for all the stuff I wanted, but holy crap is it daunting to do anything in that game.

 

Never did get to ever test it out in play. I still kind of want to, but at the same time I don't want to waste 6 hours generating a single character because somewhere along the way either the books are steering me wrong or I'm doing some bad math. And then it'd be my luck that they would die in the first round of combat, because GURPS is straight lethal, and I'd have to do it all over again.

 

3 hours ago, Sophie was taken said:

But seriously, I’ve not played much Pathfinder, but what I did was all combat - one encounter took three hours to resolve. It was not fun. If this is remedied I may be interested.

 

in the other hand, we may have simply had a terrible DM for that game...

 

3 hours ago, Marvin said:

No, combat indeed can be very drawn out in the 3.x system, especially at higher levels. Fiddling with the economy of actions is something on which I think most everyone, outside perhaps the hardcore power-gamers and mathematicians, would agree is a worthy idea, all things being equal.

 

45 minutes ago, Thes Hunter said:

I sometimes feel like I might as well be playing calculus master when it comes to keeping track of my bonuses. 

 

“Ok... I’m normally +5 damage, but I’m using a two handed weapon, so x1.5, then power attack adds +6, then the creature is larger +1, and I’m enlarged, and +2 for bulls strength, and bless another +1, and then bardic performance +1, oh wait bless isn’t +1 on damage just to hit and fear effects...

 

wait where was I again? Ok I’m usually +5 on damage, I’m wieldingmy weapon.... “ 

 

Oh god yes. All of this is true. Horribly, horribly true. And it's part of why I love 5e. The stacking bonuses largely went away. The economy of actions is down to 4 "primary" action types(Move, Action, Bonus Action, Reaction) with the Free Action sticking around as always for stuff like talking. And advantage/disadvantage got rid of so many stupid "numbers for the sake of numbers" situations.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't play Pathfinder, I'm very happy with 5e.

But I'm interested in where this might go. Personally I don't feel like PF1 is the right system for me, because there are too many books and player options (from what I hear some perform a lot better than others) and too much math involved in playing. But I already have a game system I know and feel comfortable with.

I do hope that they don't make PF2 for me and the other newbz that got started with 5e. A lot of us already have what we want.

Hopefully it will be a better PF for the PF1 community. From what I hear and read, a lot of PF players seem to quite enjoy parts of it I personally dislike, like having an all-you-can-eat player options buffet, so that being identified as too bloaty would suck for them.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nunae said:

I don't play Pathfinder, I'm very happy with 5e.

But I'm interested in where this might go. Personally I don't feel like PF1 is the right system for me, because there are too many books and player options (from what I hear some perform a lot better than others) and too much math involved in playing. But I already have a game system I know and feel comfortable with.

I do hope that they don't make PF2 for me and the other newbz that got started with 5e. A lot of us already have what we want.

Hopefully it will be a better PF for the PF1 community. From what I hear and read, a lot of PF players seem to quite enjoy parts of it I personally dislike, like having an all-you-can-eat player options buffet, so that being identified as too bloaty would suck for them.

 

Yes. I like having a bunch of options and the min maxing that can go with it. 

 

I like the the very tactical nature of the game. 

 

Though I made fun of all the number crunching, I have figured out a way for it to be manageable for myself in game. One of my big annoyances is that some haven’t, and when we are playing a timed special, they have to go back through and do the whole calculation (generally out loud) every round, after they roll their attack, regardless if none of the modifiers changed from the round previously. 

 

:facepalm: 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, TheAuldGrump said:

Locally, it is on par with Pathfinder, but neither Pathfinder nor 5e has reached anywhere near the dominance of 3.5.

 

2e... hard to say, the local bookstores were only there for the tail end of 2e, when TSR was crashing and burning. (We lost a lot of bookstores around that time - Bookland, Booksmith, and others just folded up their tents.)

 

But from what I saw... 3e left that tag end of 2e in the dust. AD&D was dying hard.

 

3e brought back a lot of old timers - myself included.

 

The Auld Grump

3e brought me back in. It had been years since I'd even looked at an RPG book, any RPG book. Battlefleet Gothic and 40K were where it was at at that point, and I thought I was done. 

 

Boy was I wrong...

 

Now, I've never played Pathfinder, mostly because I felt that I was ready for the tactical simplicity of 4e, and done with the mess that 3.5 had become. I didn't need 3.75... and now that I'm playing 5e and Basic D&D, unless Pathfinder 2.0 does something really interesting... I'm probably going to mostly ignore it anyway.  

 

6 hours ago, Unruly said:

<snip>

 

Oh god yes. All of this is true. Horribly, horribly true. And it's part of why I love 5e. The stacking bonuses largely went away. The economy of actions is down to 4 "primary" action types(Move, Action, Bonus Action, Reaction) with the Free Action sticking around as always for stuff like talking. And advantage/disadvantage got rid of so many stupid "numbers for the sake of numbers" situations.

Yes! This!! 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I am old school.  I don't find Pathfinder or GURPS hard to figure out.  Now Space Opera was another thing..

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pathfinder 2 is both exciting, daunting and questionable.  I am one that bought into the Golarion setting (bleachling gnomes anyone?) and have an 86x42 map of the Inner Sea up on my wall.  It has a lot of things going for a campaign setting.  It is also very difficult to create a character without a system like Hero Labs (which I do have).  

Having bought the Starfinder core book for our PbP (below), I can imagine the rules revision to be very similar... and I am ok with that.  Keeping things simple in a complicated world is very appealing.  We have certainly seen that on the Wizards side of the fence.  Of course, having a rockstar gawd like Mercer helps to sell product (yeah, so I drank the koolaid... it's good stuff!)... but lately I've been impressed with how D&D Beyond makes the simplicity even more awesome.  I no longer carry books or character sheets to the table... just my tablet (which just got upgraded to a Fire 10 that will be delivered tomorrow so my iPad gen 1 can rest... in peace...) a notebook and dice.  

I've spent more times looking up stuff at the table in Pathfinder games than actually playing... where my recent experiences in 5e have been vastly different.  We play!  We laugh.  We do awesome stuff and we cheer when we get asked, "How do you want to do this?" Granted, the rulesets available in Pathfinder are currently significant.  Where the ruleset used in 5e is much simplified.  

I can get the same simplified interest out of Starfinder though... so, I'm fairly certain there will be some things that are streamlined.  And over time we will see creep.  I think the real winner of a P2e system will be the group that does what Curse did for 5e.  Go beyond... with a simple interface to be used at the table.  Maybe Wolf Lair will win that with the new online system.  We'll see... I would evaluate that but I still haven't gotten in successfully... so... 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Thes Hunter said:

 

Yes. I like having a bunch of options and the min maxing that can go with it. 

 

I like the the very tactical nature of the game. 

 

Though I made fun of all the number crunching, I have figured out a way for it to be manageable for myself in game. One of my big annoyances is that some haven’t, and when we are playing a timed special, they have to go back through and do the whole calculation (generally out loud) every round, after they roll their attack, regardless if none of the modifiers changed from the round previously. 

 

:facepalm: 

 

Characters like that are largely why Hero Labs saves my butt hardcore.

And I still forget to turn things on or off ... but it's less of a brain explosion than it would be without it.

 

But I am not going to make a judgment on the new edition until I actually see it in play. I've been withholding judgment on 5e, and still am, because I haven't actually /played it/. What I'm hearing though.. that implies that it works. I don't have even that much for PF2. So. .. eh. we'll see what happens.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Thes Hunter said:

I sometimes feel like I might as well be playing calculus master when it comes to keeping track of my bonuses. 

 

“Ok... I’m normally +5 damage, but I’m using a two handed weapon, so x1.5, then power attack adds +6, then the creature is larger +1, and I’m enlarged, and +2 for bulls strength, and bless another +1, and then bardic performance +1, oh wait bless isn’t +1 on damage just to hit and fear effects...

 

wait where was I again? Ok I’m usually +5 on damage, I’m wieldingmy weapon.... “ 

Grump has us trained to do 90% of that ahead of time.

 

So it doesn' t come out near that complicated in play. The Bardic Performance would be the only thing not mathed out ahead of time.

 

Calculus doesn't even enter into it, algebraic at worst.::P:

 

Quote

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 When I write up my character sheet, I also do a cheat sheet with all the calculations on it, and all the possible bonuses, mitigating factors, etc....

So I know ahead of time what my to-hit bonus is on a regular hit, when I'm flanking, etc., and what situations help me or hurt me.

Having my basic numbers already calculated and a list of the bonuses and penalties for possible situational modifiers (flanking, obscured vision, whatever), makes it incredibly easy to remember my numbers - if you read the same thing five times in a ten minute period,  it won't take too long before you have it completely memorized.

 

 In 4E, with nearly a dozen different at-will, encounter, daily and utility powers on a character by 4th level, I never once had any issue with any player taking forever to figure out their numbers for an attack or spell DC when they wrote it all down ahead of time like I told them to.

 

Edited by Mad Jack
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By aku-chan
      Presenting Amiri, she's an Iconic Barbarian from Reapers Pathfinder line.
       
      Had this one a little while, but all the fiddly bits kept putting me off (and I normally like fiddly minis), she turned out to be super fun to paint though.
       
      As always any comments or criticisms are warmly received.
    • By ksbsnowowl
      I painted Goremaw the Great Worm up as a fire-infused purple worm for a unique creature from the Pathfinder setting of Galorion.  I am running the Curse of the Crimson Throne AP in D&D 3.5, and this creature will show up in my game tonight.  It is my first finished creature miniature (I have done some terrain previously), and being a perfectionist, I put in 48 hours of work on him (lots of nooks and crannies, and I don't have an airbrush).
       
      I finished him last night, reaching the "good enough" state, as time didn't allow me to put off varnishing him any further.
       
      I started posting a WIP thread when I started working on him several months ago.  Check it out HERE.
       
      Here are my Cindermaw glamor shots.
       








    • By Nightwing
      Here is the start of pathfinder red, which I’ll be doing as a Sapphire dragon, similar to what i did with the Grenadier Red Dragon II (which I did as  a Ruby dragon) a while ago.
       
      Just base colors here; dark blue/black wash over his entire body, earth wash over the sand, and white statue. I really like how the blue and brown look together. The brown will be lightened up to sand, and the blue will end up a more saturated dark blue. I hope those colors will still look good together...
       
       


    • By Maglok
      Some people might call it Minivember, though technically I had 23 days of vacation and just wanted to paint a mini every day. Some were finishing older minis, some entirely new, some were the size of a nailclipping. I present, my Minivember.
       

       
         
       
         
       
         
       
         
       
         
       
         
       
         
       
         
       
         
       
         
       
         
       
         
       
         
       
         
       

    • By Unit04
      My friend is playing a fighter in a Pathfinder game, so I decided to take a break from my Batman game to paint up a figure for her, though I decided to paint two.  
       
      I asked her what her favorite color is, and she said "Blue", so I painted up a mini with lots of blue.  If I paint her again I think I'd pick out the fleur-de-lis in a different color, to make it stand out some more.  
       

  • Who's Online   29 Members, 1 Anonymous, 31 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...