Today we played some Pathfinder RPG. I laughed when two of our characters failed their massive damage rolls with a natural 1 and everything seemed to point to a narrow escape by the sorceress and maybe the rogue. But using a *contingency* spell she was able to get everybody out in a single round, and we got teleported to back to a temple, raised, restored, teleported back “a few days later” and just continued the same fight, with no penalties what so ever, no levels lost. In fact, with all our hit points restored and all our spells back.
That felt a bit cheap. Apparently Pathfinder RPG has even less penalties for getting raised than D&D 3.5 had – namely none. I still remember the days where getting raised cost you a point of Constitution. And in my D&D 3.5 game people still loose levels. I think that without the pain, there is no tragedy, no moaning over “meaningless” death, no fear – things I need in my D&D for me to enjoy it. As we say in German: Viel Feind, viel Ehr’! “Many enemies, lots of honor!” Something was lost when practically all the pain got removed. Negative levels are only temporary. Essentially that sets us up for a total party kill. Any interesting and challenging situation will now have to threaten a TPK in order to put fear back into the experience.
I also remember playing a paladin once that rolled a 1 for hit points gained as she leveled up. The DM had me roll again. “What?” I thought. That’s cheap! If the dice want me to play a low hit point paladin, so be it. I accept the challenge. But everybody at the table was expecting me to reroll. And I got another one. And another. And a fourth. And a fifth! I laughed so hard I cried. I got more hit points on the last roll, but the dice had certainly made it clear that they wanted Rhysalis Eina to have below average hit points!
The adventure we played, by the way, was very enjoyable: It was the old Dungeon Crawl Classic about sphinxes for level 14 and 15 characters, Lost Tomb of the Sphinx Queen. I liked it! Riddles, fights, playing smartly. The labyrinth was a bit too big, and the two last fights at the end too long. If you ever run it, try eliminating the “daughter” encounter. And think about the rules you’re going to use. Will they be for wusses? ;)
#RPG #flamebait #Old School
(Please contact me if you want to remove your comment.)
⁂
Dude...AD&D. Come back home....
– Joethelawyer 2010-06-27 03:12 UTC
---
Well, that Pathfinder campaign may be but I would not blame the rule set for the game the GM wants to run and, presumably, most of the players want to play. I run PF but ’return to life’ magic is nearly unobtainable (and teleportation is extremely restricted) and my players are cool with that. If you want a down and dirty game, convince the group you are playing with it will be more fun than one filled with cheap victories.
– Sean Holland 2010-06-27 13:48 UTC
---
@Sean Holland
I run 3.5/PF the same way. Ressurection is nearly impossible and teleportation magic is severely restricted. And my players have always been happy.
Nice to know I’m not alone in that...
– Rhetorical Gamer 2010-06-27 16:42 UTC
---
Nothing good and worthy comes easy, and this goes for RPGs too.
– Tim 2010-06-27 19:36 UTC
---
Do people just play with their friends and try to find a compromise that works for everybody over the years or do people start picking and choosing with whom to play after some years in order to play with people that are on the same page with respect to many such issues? All this social contract stuff – it’s not enough to just say “this is how we play” if that’s not what everybody really wants. We have to bring everybody to the same page, first.
Well, all these thoughts are cruising through my head as I think through the campaign feedback I got in the last few days and some people have suggested moving from D&D 3.5 to Pathfinder RPG where as I would love to move from D&D 3.5 to Labyrinth Lord.
– Alex Schroeder 2010-06-27 19:53 UTC
---
Awww ... c’mon now. To each their own - I fully support everyone having their own preferences - but Pathfinder isn’t in the Old School paradigm. It’s throughly New School _ D&D from a PCs have some Awesome from Day 1. I don’t think that’s for wusses - it’s for people who enjoy a more heroic vs. hard scrabble bend. Measured from the same yardstick - sure, it’s a lot softer on PCs._
– Brian 2010-06-28 20:13 UTC
---
To each their own – oh absolutely. 😄
I just have to articulate stuff in writing every now and then in order to think stuff through. What exactly did I dislike? Was it the adventure? Was I tired? Was it the DM’s call? Was it the rules? I decided it was a difference in what play experience the rules afford (invite, encourage) and my own thoughts on the nature of heroism (against all odds, futility, tragedy, hard toil). Once this difference is identified we can talk about solutions – house rules. But those also depend on the rest of the group which leads to thoughts on social contract, play experience expectations, and how to handle differences at the table. There’s still food for thought for me in this subject.
As for the adventure itself, I see that DM Adrian wrote a Lost Tomb of the Sphinx Queen Review. Thanks!
Lost Tomb of the Sphinx Queen Review
– Alex Schroeder 2010-06-28 23:31 UTC