|
Not satisfied with the 4th edition.
The 3.5 edition was a clunky nightmare to run. A rules lawyer could easily min-max a god by 5th level. Has Pathfinder fixed these problems?
Have they made PF easier to run? Monsters with full stats were just too much work.
Thinking about using Castles and Crusades or Pathfinder.
Give me a lowdown on the Pathfinder RPG.
Pathfinder has made many changes, some minor and some major, that help to address many of the most abusive parts of the 3.5 system, however, at its core it is simply a patch on top of the 3.x rules system. It still has warts, it still has some blemishes, and many of the things that had been addressed in later supplements for 3.5 did not make it into PF somehow. With all of that said, PF is still my game of choice. I just choose to patch the holes I find, as I find them. Some patches require pulling in things that were already there in 3.5, others are simply a matter of organization etc. In any event, as I said, PF is my system of choice.
Castles & Crusades is *extremely* rules-light and very fast to play. I had a *great* time running it and plan to incorporate several of the things I learned from C&C into the next PF campaign I run. Also, given the difference in how characters are made it is very hard to min-max in the system. However, after a short time of playing in / running C&C I decided the warts with that system were too much to bear. The Siege mechanic, while appearing elegant at first glance, quickly falls apart.
Just my opinions of course.
All of the classic problems of 3.5 are still present, but are significantly reduced in magnitude. Everything is more balanced and slightly simpler. The distance between the best character and the worst character has lessened considerably, so there's a lot less of that feeling like you "have" to min-max just to be a viable character.
Short version of the major changes:
-HUGE class rebalance, both in power and in variability.
-Skill system condensed, and the cross-class skill system obsoleted by a far superior method.
-All combat maneuvers follow the same system.
Those at least are the three things that are the most important to me. I bought the Pathfinder core as soon as I discovered it despite not having a single person to play with, and that decision ushered me into online gaming.
Total honesty: It sounds like Pathfinder isn't what you want.
If you were the type of person who had problems with minmaxers and wanted all of their toys taken away (understandable IMO) then Pathfinder probably isn't for you. It does a small amount to nerf the most extreme problems, but they didn't rewrite every splatbook from 3.5, so if you're allowing that material you still have a problem.
The people who get the most out of Pathfinder are people who were okay with 3.5 but wanted some new stuff and slight changes. A lot of the changes aren't simpler, just different.
There are lots of games out there. I suggest you find one less prone to abuse if that's your biggest issue searching for a game.
Pathfinder is right for me, though.
Wow.
(hands OP an asbestos suit)
:-)
This sounds mean, but I specifically limit 3.5 content in my games to either approval by me (the GM) or a rewrite by either myself (or these boards, they're good at that). It's different for everyone, but the problem I had with 3.5 is that players would buy splatbooks that were intentionally made overpowered (to sell more, can't blame the publishers there as they're making a living). The players would expect to be able to use the products just cause they bought it, even if it was overpowered and not very balanced (I don't think smaller 3PP have as much time to donate to looking for flaws).
So I guess to summarize, try running a game of RAW (some call plain vanilla) Pathfinder, and slowly allow content you have reviewed to enter your game. Hope it helps...
|
From the sounds of it, PFRPG may not be the thing for you. PFRPG is, at it's core, 3.5 D&D. The changes that they made simplified some of the rules (Combat Maneuvers, Dispel, Int changes, etc.), but the complexity of the system is still there. That's what kept most of the people here on the boards who didn't switch to 4ed or some other system to stay with 3.5 playing. Monsters are still going to have a full stat block, and you are going to have to do some flipping through the book to see abilities.
In our old 3.5 games we tended to not allow any 3pp material unless DM gave approval, and then older 3.5 WotC books were on most approval (Meaning, make your character and DM checks at the end to make sure it isn't an overpowered monster). Newer WotC books needed to be reviewed by the DM until they could figure out specifics (Like banning one or two feats, etc.).
The biggest gain I've seen from PFRPG so far in the overpoweredness respect is that we simply run Core + Paizo games only. Since the Paizo material is very miniscule compared with WotC splatbooks it made most characters that much closer to core.
If you want to get an idea of changes from 3.5 to PFRPG, you can check out the PRD (SRD but for Pathfinder) here.
This sounds mean, but I specifically limit 3.5 content in my games to either approval by me (the GM) or a rewrite by either myself (or these boards, they're good at that). It's different for everyone, but the problem I had with 3.5 is that players would buy splatbooks that were intentionally made overpowered (to sell more, can't blame the publishers there as they're making a living). The players would expect to be able to use the products just cause they bought it, even if it was overpowered and not very balanced (I don't think smaller 3PP have as much time to donate to looking for flaws).
So I guess to summarize, try running a game of RAW (some call plain vanilla) Pathfinder, and slowly allow content you have reviewed to enter your game. Hope it helps...
This is exaclty what I am doing with a group of players that have switched over from 4e. So far it is going very well, but the above posters are 100% right when they point out that this is recognizeable as a 3.XX game. If you didn't enjoy 3.5, I'd be (pleasantly) surprised if Pathfinder is the right fit for you.
Not satisfied with the 4th edition.
The 3.5 edition was a clunky nightmare to run. A rules lawyer could easily min-max a god by 5th level. Has Pathfinder fixed these problems?
It is much less of a problem in my personal experience; YMMV. Now, a CORE PF 5th level character is going to be more powerful than a CORE 3.5 5th level character, but a group of CORE PF characters are going to be more balanced with each other and have something they can all contribute.
It IS still a problem if you allow gazillion splatbooks in addition to core, as others have mentioned. But I don't consider that a problem with Pathfinder or 3.5. It's a problem with the glut of crappy supplementary material out there, but the joy of "supplementary" material is it's, well, supplementary. Don't use it, or use them with caution, and a number of problems are immediately alleviated, IMO and in my personal experience.
Have they made PF easier to run? Monsters with full stats were just too much work.
Marginally, and the stat blocks are overall better written, but it's still a lot of work. I tend to copy-paste from the PRD and write up my own custom stat blocks from there, which, totally admittedly, is quite a lot of work. In fact, sadly, I'm pretty sure my DM prep time in preparing monsters and NPCs hasn't changed at all since our conversion from 3.x to Pathfinder. It might have even gotten longer, because I run a high level adventure, and there are very few high level CR monsters in the Bestiary, which is very frustrating. I find myself converting monsters from other 3.5 books or HD-leveling ones in the Bestiary, which takes a lot of time.
Mind you, I still LIKE Pathfinder. I like the Combat Maneuver rules, I love the revamped skill system, I like the revised races and classes. There's a lot I like about the core 3.x "engine" that I feel for my gaming tastes, is the game that I personally want to run when I want to run a fantasy adventure with a tactical feel to the combat. But like 3.x, especially if you are writing your adventures from scratch, GM prep time is considerable. If you want a game you can run on the fly, Pathfinder, like its predecessor, is not the game for you.
Thinking about using Castles and Crusades or Pathfinder.Give me a lowdown on the Pathfinder RPG.
I know absolutely nothing about C&C, sorry.
You can read all the Pathfinder rules for yourself here so despite what's said here, positive or negative, I'd suggest giving it a lookover to see what you think for yourself.