Rpg review of pathfinder rpg after many months of play by sean connors

[RedBladeShining]

Thanks for the vid review. I'm looking at getting a system after many years out of the hobby and have now decided on Pathfinder over D&D 4th. I'm planning to get the Core book, Bestiary, Inner sea Guide and an adventure module to see how these things are written nowadays.

[TheWolfDogMoon]

Wow. We never allowed a 20 max character ability. We rolled 4d6 and you can throw out the lowest dice. You do that for each ability. Then you add or subtract the race bonus. Then you can add to an individual ability at a cost of 2-1 BUT could not exceed 18.

[Chaoteee]

I am interested in Pathfinder but I find your review to be lacking. Game balance is meaningless to a good DM; he can easily put a scare in PCs. Rules are merely a skeleton for

storytelling. You are the DM nothing is overpowered

[runebeo]

ask players to go for the odd feat for spice not sheer power. powerhouses can get boring so consider thinking about building on character's personality, everyone has hobbies that do little for their profession yet in their spare time its what they love to do. If you encourage role-playing you'll get a peak experience with memorable characters. Our group rarely plays characters higher than level 15 and the odd session we try our secondary or third string characters out to keep things fresh

[talhoyle]

None of my players have ever chosen to take a hit point for favoured class bonus. We use the hell out of skills in my campaigns.

[cupcakus]

Usually I only do 20 point buys, which seems to make nice average characters. and the core rules do say that 4d6 is default method. Most of my players take the skill point... it might vary depending on the campaign... there's a lot of roleplay in my games, and after the 5th time the group has no one with Knowledge(Arcana) or they fail to climb a wall and get stuck for hours they start to put a lot more effort into skills

[DevilOfRoses]

13. My apologies. Statement 7 was a little out of line. Still, saying something 'falls apart' or 'doesn't work in play' is reaching. I've seen a lot of what you've mentioned in the negative work out just fine. Though I think I agree on the undead aspect. I think they need the miss chance AND the half damage without ghost touch weapons. A lot of what I mentioned is simply disputing your claims, the game does have flaws but they vary from group to group rather than being anything concrete.

[DevilOfRoses]

11. I admit, I do miss the 50% chance of the weapon damage from magical weapons. I think it balances out however. You also forget the golden rule: whatever the players can do the NPC's can do, and sometimes better. Toss in an evil cleric with those undead and that encounter takes on a far more lethal tone. It's all in how you build it.

12. "Doesn't work in play" is an incredible logical fallacy. "Doesn't work for me and my group" is more accurate. New rules often mean changing your approach.

[DevilOfRoses]

8. Personally. I think the sweet spot is still there. I like to think it's broader even rather than smaller.

9. I agree, the old grapple rules weren't as complex as people thought. The knew Combat Maneuvers rolls work fine, I've seem them effective at high and low levels for PC's and monsters.

10. CR's are hard to calculate, I find it a flaw of 3.5 in general. I think PRPG gets them a little closer to the mark but still misses here and there.

[DevilOfRoses]

7. I'm going out on a limb here but it sounds like your idea of 'playable' is an incredibly low powered game where PC's don't need to bother developing an indepth character as they need to plan on five on the off chance on might survive to 2nd level. Hardlining only encourages more powergaming in the long run and with stat rolling you run into lack of balance between PC's. One character with two 18's and nothing else below 14 while the rest are hovering around 12 and 10.

[DevilOfRoses]

5. I'm finding a lot of your points seem very group specific rather than universal.

6. Your ill omen build is nice. I as a DM love it when PC's focus all their starting efforts to become 1 trick ponies. Makes it so much easier to counter them. It is disgusting though, but nothing I haven't seen a variant of before in a 3.5 rules set, that's more a flaw with the 3.5 rules set in general that the inclusion of traits simply enhances slightly.

[DevilOfRoses]

4. Selective channeling is not required. I've games with some mighty power gamers of the divine persuasion and when you're dealing with something as important as feats it's easy to look at it and go 'meh' and move on with your build. Not that it's useless, it's simply not a must have.

3.a. I still can't understand the focus on 'no risk'. Personally I think it's just right, present but not something that requires you to come to a 1st level session with 5 character sheets.

[DevilOfRoses]

2.a I made a rogue for my PFS character, having plenty of skills I gave him the extra hit point, when I later made an Oracle, fewer skills and not as high of an Int I gave him the skill point. Especially seeing as he could heal himself.

3. Death not being a threat, no, it's not as much of a threat but it's still a very real risk at 1st level. My Oracle and Rogue both got knocked below zero during their first level adventures. Rogue was barely saved a hairsbreadth from his -con. Quite risky.

[DevilOfRoses]

A few points I contest:

1. Stat buying strikes me as being a safe and secure way to making an acceptable character whereas dice rolling is the door to power. Never even considered 25 point buy to be 'good' perse, more like average.

2. HP over skill points? That's a difference in play style my friend. My players will take one or the other depending on their character. Often I see the more melee oriented classes taking the skill point (skills are valuable dammit) while the weaker classes the HP.

[mortonstromgal]

Take the HP? Sorry there are many skill monkey builds like Bards where I'd rather have the skill point. Heck even some fighter builds to get that +3 bonus for the first rank in a skill. I agree with roll the attributes for old school play but other than that I have been pleasantly surprised at the lack of power creep compared to the end of 3e where 9th level spells were being slung around at 9th character level or less (even with WOTC only books)

[inlife9]

I got out of D&D at 2nd. Been looking at Pathfinder at the stores. It has a nutty amount of stuff out for it. What I can not decide is if anyone that has played Savage Worlds Fantasy (enough to know that it has much to offer) would want to even get this huge rule game. I guess I am trying to figure out what really draws a player to Pathfinder instead of a rules light game that is exsiting from lvl 1-up. I'm gonna run my group through one, I need help though..Why would I choose Pathfinder?

[jrpipik]

The problem with the "sweet spot" being 5-8 level is that most people stop playing long before that. Taking the perspective of players who enjoyed that challenge and stuck with the game leaves out the far greater number of people who get tired of being weak and on the edge of death at all times. More powerful low level characters means more satisfied players. They want to be heroes!

[karelgh1]

There are 2 inconsistencies in your argument for power creep.

25 point buy is not standard. 15 is standard for society play and 20 for AP's. 25 point buy is for epic characters, then don't complain your characters are epic.

Power creep can only be stated relative to the enemies. NPC humanoid have a similar increase in power, thus no power creep here.

'Wealthy parents' is strong at low levels (Hence why it's banned from society play)? Though have you plated that sorcerer beyond level 5?

[lenowin]

Every rule in every book of every game can be changed to suit personal tastes. For instance, people in my Pathfinder game die at 0 hp regardless of stats, ala old school d&d, and breath of life/resurrect type of spells and abilities don't exist at all. Simply remove em and your game becomes far more dangerous, and fun :)

[MidnightDefender]

I would love to play in your World.. We play on ITabletop now since most of us have moved away from one another. LOVE playing Pathfinder, eventhough it's not a tabletop the webcams work great! GREAT REVIEW my friend.

[Znadder]

Not using APG just because something in it is "broken" as you say is just, in my mind, strange as a GM. You take away new customization options from the players, and a lot of fun:) In my mind as a GM, houseruling is king, use it:) Not that I dont think you do Sean:) Great review, though I obviously disagree with a lot of it!:)

[Ghaladen]

Yeah I kind of agree. Much like 4th edition, even at low levels its tough go put a real scare in players, short of throwing the APL levels out the window. But I guess if it boiled down to choosing one system: 3.5 or Pathfinder, which would it be?

[TheOutsiders68]

@Ghaladen pathfinder with changes

[scandicci2]

Sean, I just rolled a new character for pathfinder with a new group of 5 other players. My bonuses equal +3 (str +2, dex +1, con 0, int 0, wis +1, cha -1). I am playing a half elf ranger. Based on this review of pathfinder core rules my player is unplayable. I should add that we used the 4d6, 7 times method. The rest of the group averages +8 for bonuses related to characteristics. The group is HUM DRUID, HalfElf Cleric, HalfOrc Barb, Halfling Mage, Elf Bard, HalfElf Ranger. Any advice?

[Webhead123]

Thank you for the insight. I haven't played PF yet but I have heard about the evolution of the "power creep" in the game. Not to my taste really, as I felt that 3e was already a bit too over-the-top as is.

Then again, it's no secret that I'm a bit burned out on "high, epic fantasy" these days...a rather distressing position to be in when one considers the games that dominate the core of the hobby.

[TheOutsiders68]

@Webhead123 hi mate been away a bit whats happening.....

[Webhead123]

@TheOutsiders68 Great to hear from you! I hope you're doing well. Life's been busy but I'm still chugging along. I've started doing a series of vids on WFRP 3rd Edition and I encourage you to check them out when you have the time. I'd love to hear your comments on them. Hope to see some more vids from you soon as your time frees up again. Cheers!

[TheOnlyAttrition]

To be honest, i like the point-buy system (though i do remenicse about my days rolling stats in 3.5; i play dnd 4e now), because it lets you further refine your character concept by choosing how many good scores you have and how many average to low scores you have, with obvious limitations; instead of relying on the quirks of the dice to get high scores or getting low scores due to said quirks of the dice. Overall, i like a game where i can customize my character's attributes to fit my concept.

[TheOnlyAttrition]

does Pathfinder still use that crappy challenge rating system when building monster

encounter groups?

[TheOutsiders68]

@TheOnlyAttrition the challenge system altered slightly but still the same idea..

[murphysborounderdark]

Im pretty surprised by some of this. I think it may be a difference of style in the way the DM is running the game. I was shocked when you said the players should take the HP. I was further shocked when you said the cleric should take the feat that allows ranged healing. Perhaps the players are running into far too much combat, and too few skill tests. Im running PF and playing in a PF game. My 9th level cleric cannot ranged heal, and never took the extra hp.

[pISSUMTREE]

@murphysborounderdark I am pretty sure Sean is refering to the Cleric "channelling " power, its a rng heal "30feet centred from the Cleric. The Feat he is refering to is called Selective Channelling which allows you to exclude "foes" within 30 feet who will not benefit from the healing .(without the feat all living beings within 30 feet are healed ..etc etc).

[murphysborounderdark]

@pISSUMTREE Thanks, I couldnt think of the name off the top of my head. I think the option of that feat is great, but I dont think a cleric needs it, or should always take it. I will agree with one thing though, the amount of stuff characters can do in this game is far beyond D&D3.5. I dont think that is a bad thing, it is, like he said, a little subtle when you first glance over the rules.

[beatboxpeej]

The party composition isn't a symptom of a bad system. The group should really talk and decide what kind of campaign they going to play. Pathfinder system isn't different than DnD 3.5 on that point. We play this "edition" the same way we played 3.5. I always blame the GM for the balance issues. This system is very strong. Strong enough to make my player turn from 4E to Path. A Sorcerer level 1 will never be able to fight a Barbarian level 1. They aren't meant to be balanced.

[azirk83]

I find it interesting that after months of play, you've run into some of the issues I had with the system within minutes of reading it. I was honestly hoping you'd bring up the Fighter sucking or the Fly skill being fail, but alas that shall not come to pass.

Good to see you're not just another raving fanboy, Sean. If I did this video with these same points and I'd have a dozen dislikes. Belay that "True D&D" crap. True D&D came in a brown or white box, everything else is derivative.

[powerfamiliar]

Miss chance can make incorporeal follk much harder, but also much easier. A lucky string of rolls and that ghost is out in a round or two, an unlucky string and its a TPK. I think 50% damage takes some of the randomness away, but maybe makes the fights a bit less memorable. I'm sorta find with that if the party is let's say fighting a horde of shadows or something similar, but against boss type ghosts I might bring back miss chance.

[TheOutsiders68]

@powerfamiliar a good point well said...

[TheOutsiders68]

thanks all for your views each to there own however always share and grow.

[pridday88]

As a DM I like having the minus HP to death being CON rather than -10 because I can go ahead and have them attacked all out without too many outright deaths. Also, it allows for characters to be reduced to unconscious and captured after a big fight rather than a TPK. The APG is rubbish? *gasp* I love my APG! However, my players had no interest at all except for some of the core class archetypes. The traits also went mostly by the wayside; I agree that the traits vary too widely in power.

[karigaut]

Been waiting for this re-review... I agree with you on most of your points, especially the power creep, I feel like this system forces players to try to make super characters instead of characters that they want to role-play. For example no one in my group has low constitution... I mean the wizard has nearly as many HP as the Paladin.

[tetsubo57]

While I agree with you, it breaks my heart that the 'true' D&D isn't actually called D&D any longer. It just makes me want to mourn for what WotC once was.

I don't mind power gaming. I like being effective & having fun. I could never go back to stat rolling. Just put a bonus cap in place. No more than +X. X being whatever makes you happy.

I disagree, a skill point can be just as effective as a HP. For the right build.

The APG presents you with things core doesn't. I like some of those things.

[Aristocritic]

Great video, I definitely agree with most of what you said here.

I've been looking seriously at using E6 for Pathfinder. Combined with some of the advice given here I think it could work out well.

[alokov]

@Aristocritic but it sounds llike so much of the stuff is so easily breakable, that while it may be cool, it is far outweighed by the breakability. I haven't read either core or APG though.

[Samwise7RPG]

Yeah, I've come to the conclusion that rolling up stats is the best way to go, even with the minor bitching and moaning. :) I just find that characters are more interesting with a few low or lower stats. I'm not a fan of the Power Creep in some modern games, which is probably why I've been rediscovering older games, or retro-clones of older games. It sounds like some of the things you discovered can be fixed with some house rules.

[tewalker13]

Awesome vid Sean, gave me some kool things to think about for my own system (which has been coming along quite nicely I think!) Props to the vid.

[TheOutsiders68]

my thanks ,I just hope it was not to long!

[LifegrindX]

Very informational review. Love your videos, keep it up!