From the sound of the original post, this is Alpha.  It might be a throw-it-against-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks release at this point.

Very very interesting. I'm glad. Perhaps if one person (Paizo) is willing to do it, others will as well. The diversification continues...

Quote from: obrynI've looked through the pdf and - while I like many of the changes - it looks like quite bigger changes than the 3.0-3.5 conversion...

Lots of variant feats, lots of variant spells, skill overhaul, several variant classes, many changes to each race, changes to HPs, and mechanical changes like to wizard specialization and domain class features...  It's pretty substantial.

In other words, "This is not the 3.75 you're looking for."

Apart from changing skills to be more Saga-Like, it's all added complexity, not reduced whatsoever.

Er, huh?

It looks like by and large, the feats and spells were change to accommodate other changes in the system, like skill modifiers to accommodate the change in skill categories, and change in black tentacles to accommodate the change in the grapple rules.

For those who are glad - are you glad because you want Paizo (or anyone) to stick it to WotC or are you glad because you want to give their incarnation of 3.75 a chance?

Honest question.

Like I said from way back, what I'm looking for is a decent trimming of the 3.5 rules - like a Saga-fication for the Star Wars d20 rules set.  I was hoping to get that out of 4.0, but I'm skeptical I will.

This isn't it.  I mean, I like a lot of this - but I think the compatibility they're advertising with 3.x is dramatically overstated.

-O

Quote from: Caesar SlaadEr, huh?

It looks like by and large, the feats and spells were change to accommodate other changes in the system, like skill modifiers to accommodate the change in skill categories, and change in black tentacles to accommodate the change in the grapple rules.

Er... yeah?

Just because it's the domino effect, doesn't make the change any less significant or reduce the system's overall complexity.

-O

Quote from: obrynFor those who are glad - are you glad because you want Paizo (or anyone) to stick it to WotC or are you glad because you want to give their incarnation of 3.75 a chance?

I'm glad becuase it means a thriving supported community for a game I am interested in.

I'm sure 4e will be plenty successful and Paizo won't change that.

Gotta say I like this sounds rather encouraging.

I'm glad cause there may be a larger base of 3.5 players. I actually do not mind 3.5 and would keep playing it. This way I can.

I actually started to consider buying other 3.5 books again.

There will be playtesting. The release as is, is beta. Anybody know what Paizo playtesting is like? How much change to the beta is possible?

Quote from: obrynEr... yeah?

Just because it's the domino effect, doesn't make the change any less significant or reduce the system's overall complexity.

Man, what? Somehow, by simplifying things, they are making "variants" out of them and making them more comlpex? :confused:

Quote from: Caesar SlaadMan, what? Somehow, by simplifying things, they are making "variants" out of them and making them more comlpex? :confused:

Right, I'm not seeing the simplifications - except, as I mentioned, with the skills.

The classes they've modified have increased in complexity (including making the fighter more complicated), the races have new (and more) features, in addition to unbalanced modifiers, and enough is different that the 3.5-Pathfinder conversion seems less smooth than 3.0-3.5 (and I didn't think it was that smooth).

Perhaps I'd have a different view if I saw everything in one book - but this is my current impression.  I don't think it ever simplifies things to have your main rulebook heavily modified by another rulebook in this many fundamental ways.

-O

Quote from: obrynRight, I'm not seeing the simplifications - except, as I mentioned, with the skills.

The classes they've modified have increased in complexity (including making the fighter more complicated), the races have new (and more)

Gotcha. I was more focusing on the comment with regard to feats and spells, which I've already stated my case for.

Classes. Well, "dead levels" have been rued, and most recent D20 spinoffs have made sure to have a named feature at every level. I think it's a good move. (And if you are updating to 4e, one you will be familiar with.)

The only thing I really hate is ditching skill ranks. I know SAGA has its fans, but I think its a truly wretched idea.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadGotcha. I was more focusing on the comment with regard to feats and spells, which I've already stated my case for.

Classes. Well, "dead levels" have been rued, and most recent D20 spinoffs have made sure to have a named feature at every level. I think it's a good move. (And if you are updating to 4e, one you will be familiar with.)

The only thing I really hate is ditching skill ranks. I know SAGA has its fans, but I think its a truly wretched idea.

Well, I may or may not upgrade to 4e.  I know that I'll give it a shot - either as player or GM - but WotC makes me alternately happy and sad with each announcement.

Like I said - when all of this is put into one big book, maybe I'll see things differently.

Right now, it looks more like an opportunity for the Paizo guys to publish their house-rules.  That may or may not be a fair assessment, and I certainly think their changes are overall good (like, for instance, the skill changes and the feat-every-odd-level).  If they want to make 3.5-compatible materials, though, they should maybe put a bit more effort into compatibility.

-O

I think Paizo is going to fail. Here are a few reasons:

1-The timing is downright horrible. If they wanted to make a stand, they had to decide much earlier, at the time Wizards announced 4e. Get the playtest going then and be ready to compete with 4e with a full release before the end of 2008 (preferably something like July). This Alpha/Beta playtesting thing? It's going to die quietly in June, when 4e is released. All the D&D/OGL/D20 excitment will turn towards 4e-related matters.  

2-It seems they are listening to an extremely vocal minority of gamers. Most people will jump to 4e, including most so-called "haters".

3-Old D20-related products are already losing value, including recent releases. Publishers are experimenting a drop. We're going to see more and more old D&D material and 3rd party stuff in the bargain bin. This mean that effectively, Pathfinder needs to compete not just with 4e but with a FUCKING HUGE back-catalog of 3.x products. Everything that could possibly be written for D&D3.x was probably already written. And much of it will be on sale. They're basically supporting a system that's not only dead but doesn't need any support whatsoever.

4-The raison d'être of this product implies that it is doomed. On one hand, they are refractary to change and to a new edition. But their way of countering that is... with a new fucking edition? On one hand, they can't stray too far from 3.5 because they want to be compatible. On the other hand, if they are too similar, who the fuck is going to buy the books with all those 3.x books still around? It makes no sense.

5-I downloaded their Pathfinder Alpha. It's an amateurish collection of houserules for 3.x. It sucks. At the very least, they should get a few more companies on board and hire a few big guns. You pool ressources with some heavyweights like Green Ronin, Privateer, Troll Lord, Goodman. You get Pramas and Kenson involved. You get a few more names, perhaps even old school guys for consultation (Gygax and Arneson come to mind if we go back to 4e's announcement many months ago). You make a clean system, strip it down a little. You target old school gaming. Not an alternative to what we had last week.


On the positive side:

-It's free
-It doesn't hurt anyone to have a new option
-The art in the free product is already better than most art in published books costing a lot of dollars
-Competition helps keeping everyone on their toes. I'm all for that as a consummer

But it's still going to fail unless they change the plan somehow.

This idea of pathfinder 3.x doesn't seem like a good one.

They're cutting themselves off from thier main support base: D&D players.

T20, M&M, and such have survived because they altered the SRD to the point that they've become their own game.

A revised 3.x without the D&D label is just someones D&D houserules. When put up against the real thing it will fall short.

Pazio was a Suckerfish feeding off of the leavings of the big D&D Shark. Leaving their meal ticket doesn't make much sense.


.

I've just given the alpha a quick scan and rather like it. The cleaned up (and more useful) feats are cool, as is the CMB (Combat Manever Bonus) rule that underpins all the tricky and sometimes headache-inducing stuff like grapple. It'd be pretty easy to extrapolate a more freeform stunting system from it.

I'll still be buying 4E, but it's cool to see a company that's passionate about the system trying to create a niche for itself in a changing market. Whether or not they will be successful with this I couldn't say.