On Wed, 7 Mar 2018 14:26:41 -0800 (PST), Justisaur
Post by Justisaur
Sounds like they want to move slightly in the 5e D&D direction,
trying to reign in the magic item christmas tree, and three actions.
Maybe changing terminology to try to distance themselves from D&D.
I'm slightly more interested in this than I was in PF1e, but that's not saying much.
I am less sanguine about the update, but not because of the proposed
changes. I just hate how these updates result in increased costs,
confusion and fragmentation, without any real gain. Yes, they will fix
some problems, but inevitably this new edition will have all new
problems. Meanwhile, I'll have to buy new rules, new sourcebooks; I'll
have to worry about whether adventure X will work with edition Y, I'll
worry about players will want to play 1st or 2nd edition (inevitably,
there will be a split). It's just a lot of wasted energy, emotion and
money I'd rather do without. It's also a good way for a game to lose
players; why struggle trying to figure which edition to use when you
can just jump to another game entirely?
But of course, the real problem is the focus on the rules and system,
as if making a few changes are going to fix the underlying issue with
/all/ role-playing games: you can't model real life with a few rules
and dice rolls. A new edition's worth of rules isn't going to change
that basic fact.
Ultimately, all games are flawed, unbalanced, too complex, not complex
enough, overpowered, underpowered, what have you. Switching to a new
edition - or a new game - isn't going to fix these problems, they'll
just switch things about a bit. Good DMing - writing good aventures,
finding the balance between playability and realism that you and your
players enjoy, being a fair and consistent referee, etc. etc. - are
far, far, /far/ more essential to an enjoyable game session than
whether you are playing D&D or Traveller or Exalted or Pathfinder,
much less what edition you are using. My general opinion is that if
you are arguing about the rules, then /you are playing the game
wrong/. Focus more on having fun and providing a memorable experience
than whether it makes sense that a crossbow only does 1d6 damage or
that the wizard is overpowered.
Well, either way it is no real skin off my back; I don't play
Pathfinder - at least not with any regularity. I just personally think
Paizo would be better off working on settings and adventures - which
admittedly has been their bread and butter for the past few years -
rather than chase the white rabbit of the perfect rule system. If they
feel the rules don't work in certain areas, either spin off an
entirely new game or do like TSR did, and perhaps create a new setting
where they house-rule in changes that fit that game-world better while
leaving the core unchanged.