Saturday, March 9, 2024

Pathfinder 1e Still Kicks Butt

Part of me lived in the cave in 2009 when D&D 4E was out; most everyone hated it. My brother and I loved 4E, but I also loved Pathfinder 1e, and my brother was not so hot on it. We used to have long discussions on using these rules, and he never was on board, and I was happily buying book after book and enjoying the ride. We still played 4E and enjoyed the figure battles, but it eventually let us down when we hit our mid-teens. Everything in 4E wasn't play-tested and blew up hard in our faces.

The 4E game let us down so hard that we never played 5E. We had the books, but since the ranger and rogue were meh, we did not care. We played a little Pathfinder 1e together, so I was happy.

But Pathfinder 1e is the best version of 3.5E ever written. It is a generic system tied to a world, but not really.

It is so good it competes with GURPS for me as my serious game.

I never got on board with Pathfinder 2E. I have the first-release books and many expansions, but the rules did not work, at least for me. I know people say this is simpler than 3.5E - especially at the high levels - but the classes are a mish-mash of special terms and keywords, and while I can play 3.5 solo - I can't even fathom playing one Pathfinder 2 character solo.

For example, fighters must remember four special terms: flourish, open, press, and stance. If all you are playing is a fighter, I can master these. Got a cleric? You need to know meta magic. Add a rogue? Debilitation and flourish - at least one of those is familiar to fighters. Wizard? Meta magic again. Barbarian? Flourish, open, and rage. I am familiar with two of these from the fighter class but feel overloaded. Bard? Composition and meta magic. Another new one.

A six-character party with eight unique concepts to memorize. Every feat, power, and spell has multiple tags. Tags, labels, and tags are everywhere. I get overloaded. The character sheet is worse than many tax forms and gives people with that "fear of multiple holes" phobia a fit. PF2 needs a refactor aimed at simplicity and streamlining where all the math and modifiers are removed, and it needs to move in the direction of B/X.

Too many modifiers. 5E still does a better job with the advantage and disadvantage system; even though that is used as a hammer for all problems, it still eliminates the horrible user experience of a spreadsheet for every part of the character sheet - which is the mistake PF2 made.

I like the smoothed-out progression tables in PF2; a few other things are nice. Every class is designed well and optimized for the leveling experience. The improvements are substantial, but the implementation feels like a step back that relies on too many minor stacking modifiers. Every +1 matters, but keeping track of them all drives me insane.

To be fair, generated sheets like Hero Lab and Pathbuilder do a far better job of presenting all the information and keeping the character sheets clean.

Aftermath's character sheet was more straightforward. I still like Pathfinder 2, but I just don't love it. If it comes down to that choice, I will go with games I love every time, given my limited time.

Yes, I know with 1e classes, you need to understand how they work, like barbarian rage and bardic performance - but I have been playing 3.5E for decades. As you level, PF 1e scales harder in complexity, especially the combats - where PF2 is more linear. When it comes down to a turn of actions, most characters still act the same. It is still the same old 3.5E gameplay:

  • A standard action and move.
  • Or a full-round action.
  • Everyone gets one swift action and one or more free actions.

Yes, Pathfinder 1e is broken horribly in some builds and combos, but like an older car, if you know how to drive it and its limitations, it will get you where you need to go. Like 5E, maintain a ban list, and you will be fine. If you see something crazy, make a ruling and fix it on the spot. You drive an older car, you keep a toolkit and roll of duct tape in the trunk. Can high-level combats be complicated and take a while? Name me a game where they aren't.

Pathfinder 1e is the Everquest compared to Pathfinder 2E's Everquest 2.

The original is still a classic, and the sequel is good - but it isn't the same.

And the classic 3.5E monsters are in PF 1e, the drow, and all my other favorites. I know; play with the not-remastered PF2 books; they are still there (but severely scaled back in their wickedness). But removing them feels wrong to me, like some sort of erasing of a race from history. This is Wizards' fault, so it is hard to blame Paizo, so I get it. I don't like it, but I understand it.

And make no mistake, the drow here are not some misunderstood good guys; they are demon-worshipping, conquering, wicked, and slave-taking bad guys. Without a spider goddess, they became even more vile and dark. In OG PF2, they became a shadow of themselves and were just cackling Batman villains. The writing was on the wall. By the remaster, they were gone, with no real reason for them to exist.

These are the OSR drow, and they were neutered and then erased.

Pathfinder 1e is fine.

People want to dump on it because of the "new factor" of PF2, and the fact Paizo has moved on from the OGL and SRD forever. In some strange cosmic turn of fate (corporate fire sales happen), I feel Paizo will someday end up owning D&D, and PF 1e will return someday. Don't ask me how, but stranger things have happened.

In most cases, game systems never age. In many cases, they age very well. This still has classic Wayne Reynolds art, pre-censorship, and we still get that Conan-style fantasy art vibe. A lot of the content can be edgy and triggering, and no one cares. With Pathfinder 2, I feel the game is made for conservative religious folk; the new 'sensitivity reader' vibe to the art and game content is so safe and asexual. If the old game, curses, evil classes, flesh warping, necromancy, mind control, corruption, insanity, and horror. There was plenty of male and female eye candy - of all kinds, even monsters. The game was unafraid and was made for a mature audience.

Pathfinder 2 could be sold in a Christian bookstore. It is too safe. Great rules, but the presentation is afraid of its own shadow and stumbles over itself to be overly careful. The art and graphic presentation of PF2 is impressive, but the content is defined by fear.

I get it: 'Bring your own inspiration' - but it is nice to have some help in this age of constant distraction.

Pathfinder 1e treats its readers with respect. It doesn't say it's sorry or pander. It doesn't omit topics that may upset people. It is what it is, and you make of it what you want. There are no handrails here. You can tell darker and edgier stories since the art and game presentation empower you.

It is the difference between a horror novel written for YA versus adults. Yes, the YA market is enormous, but I will always choose the latter.

Pathfinder 1e has joined the OSR. The game and its PDFs are still sold, but we will never see hardcovers again.

I have 95 data packages for Hero Lab for Pathfinder 1st Edition, a gaming lifetime. The variety of characters I can build will never get old, and very few games will come close to this many options and choices. The choices and options rival GURPS.

It was my game in 2009, and it still is today.

No comments:

Post a Comment