Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

D&D 6th Edition


D&D 4th Edition (and Beyond)

Qadira

Moving on from the inevitable wave that is 5th Edition. What would you do to simplify the Game down to a Home Play Role-play Game reminiscent of the 83 Red Box? What are the core vitals of the Character Sheet? What does the Dungeon Master need to do the Job not just well, but like a Pro Gamer and Master Storyteller?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

For me the attraction of older games is the speed and simplicity. I'd like 0E speed with 4E production values, personally. I'd like fewer, simpler options with the customisation predominantly focussed on flavor material rather than mechanics.

I dont find rules terribly important, so there's nothing in that area of the game that I would consider a "must have".

Silver Crusade

Steve Geddes wrote:

For me the attraction of older games is the speed and simplicity. I'd like 0E speed with 4E production values, personally. I'd like fewer, simpler options with the customisation predominantly focussed on flavor material rather than mechanics.

I dont find rules terribly important, so there's nothing in that area of the game that I would consider a "must have".

Please no. Dear god no. No 4e layout, no way.

Qadira

Steve Geddes wrote:

For me the attraction of older games is the speed and simplicity. I'd like 0E speed with 4E production values, personally. I'd like fewer, simpler options with the customisation predominantly focussed on flavor material rather than mechanics.

I dont find rules terribly important, so there's nothing in that area of the game that I would consider a "must have".

So being able to be the Master Story Teller as DM or an active Participant in the Greatest Fantasy Novel written by you and your DM as a Player is more important than an overabundance of rules...

Would you prefer rules that allow you to build your own Setting? Like here is how you create an Artifact (with a list of powers. handicaps to choose from)?


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
yellowdingo wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:

For me the attraction of older games is the speed and simplicity. I'd like 0E speed with 4E production values, personally. I'd like fewer, simpler options with the customisation predominantly focussed on flavor material rather than mechanics.

I dont find rules terribly important, so there's nothing in that area of the game that I would consider a "must have".

So being able to be the Master Story Teller as DM or an active Participant in the Greatest Fantasy Novel written by you and your DM as a Player is more important than an overabundance of rules...

Would you prefer rules that allow you to build your own Setting? Like here is how you create an Artifact (with a list of powers. handicaps to choose from)?

No - I'd like (and I realise this is a minority view and not likely to happen) a set of well-indexed rules about the size of the rules compendium.

After that, I'd like predominantly flavor material. Rules options are what slow the game down at our table (both in terms of levelling up and in terms of 'what to do next'). I'd prefer they provide books full of possible artifacts (one of my favorite sections of the AD&D DMG, in fact), not give me rules for building my own.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
GM Elton wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:

For me the attraction of older games is the speed and simplicity. I'd like 0E speed with 4E production values, personally. I'd like fewer, simpler options with the customisation predominantly focussed on flavor material rather than mechanics.

I dont find rules terribly important, so there's nothing in that area of the game that I would consider a "must have".

Please no. Dear god no. No 4e layout, no way.

Not layout, production values - I'd like to see high quality, hardcover, colour books with clear diagrams and wording, decent indexes and decent art.

I found the 4E rulebooks too textbooky for me and the Pathfinder rulebooks too densely written. The production values for both are exceptional though.


Steve Geddes wrote:
Please no. Dear god no. No 4e layout, no way.

Not layout, production values - I'd like to see high quality, hardcover, colour books with clear diagrams and wording, decent indexes and decent art.

I found the 4E rulebooks too textbooky for me and the Pathfinder rulebooks too densely written. The production values for both are exceptional though.

I actually like the 4E book style. All the player rule text and game information is nicely color-coded, the crunch is separated from the fluff. This is way better than the unformatted and badly structured walls of text that 3.5/PF offer.

Cheliax

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Honestly a good game is not system dependant. The creativity of the GM and the group of players you surround yourself with are whats important. As far as what a GM would need, two things. Time and effort. If you have the time and put in the effort prior to a session then you have done most of what you need to be successful. Story telling ect will come with practice.

Andoran

Pathfinder Maps Subscriber
Malaclypse wrote:
I actually like the 4E book style. All the player rule text and game information is nicely color-coded, the crunch is separated from the fluff. This is way better than the unformatted and badly structured walls of text that 3.5/PF offer.

I too like the 4e layout - nice clean black text on white background (which also made the PDFs quick to render, a problem the PF PDFs had until the lite versions), class and race descriptions starting on new pages, colour coding of powers etc.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber

It's probably a better style for a reference book and necessary given the complexity of 4E/PF. I don't think it's needed if the rules are simple though, with significantly fewer character options (which is what would suit me).


Nimon wrote:
Honestly a good game is not system dependant.

One of my friends loves to say this. I talk with him quite a bit about the philosophy of gaming and of the strengths and weakness of the hundred or so systems we have used over the years. On this point I have to disagree with him, and with you.

If the GM doesn't like a system, he can theoretically run a great game using it, but the campaign will ultimately fail because he doesn't enjoy what he's using.

If a player doesn't like a system, he can force himself to play, and might well have fun, but eventually, the fun will fade until the system becomes too much, and he'll stop enjoying himself.

System aesthetics is important. And, to an extent, so are rulebook aesthetics.

For many years (more than a decade, in fact), I didn't play 2E because I don't like the look and feel of the rulebooks. But when I got my hands on the RTFs from the core rules CD, and could eliminate that feel, I found the rules very useful, and my game grew. It was still my game, based in 1E, but it used a lot of 2E.

And, more importantly, the friend I mentioned earlier enjoyed my game much more because he could use his 2E rulebooks. He really doesn't like 1E, you see.

:)

Cheliax

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jerry Wright 307 wrote:
Nimon wrote:
Honestly a good game is not system dependant.

One of my friends loves to say this. I talk with him quite a bit about the philosophy of gaming and of the strengths and weakness of the hundred or so systems we have used over the years. On this point I have to disagree with him, and with you.

If the GM doesn't like a system, he can theoretically run a great game using it, but the campaign will ultimately fail because he doesn't enjoy what he's using.

If a player doesn't like a system, he can force himself to play, and might well have fun, but eventually, the fun will fade until the system becomes too much, and he'll stop enjoying himself.

System aesthetics is important. And, to an extent, so are rulebook aesthetics.

For many years (more than a decade, in fact), I didn't play 2E because I don't like the look and feel of the rulebooks. But when I got my hands on the RTFs from the core rules CD, and could eliminate that feel, I found the rules very useful, and my game grew. It was still my game, based in 1E, but it used a lot of 2E.

And, more importantly, the friend I mentioned earlier enjoyed my game much more because he could use his 2E rulebooks. He really doesn't like 1E, you see.

:)

If there is something about a system you dont like, simply change it. The most important thing in any D@D edition is that the rule book is simply a guideline and the GM is the law of the game. Newer editions tuck that little nugget away in the GM section, it used to be the first thing you read in the 1st ed.


The problem arises when the players like one thing and the GM likes another. The GM is the arbiter of the rules, and he decides which rules he's using.

If the players don't like it, it cuts down on their enjoyment, and the game suffers.

It also suffers if the GM has to make allowances for his players and implements a rule or system he doesn't like.

But one thing many years of GMing have taught me is that a game isn't worth running if it's assembled by committee.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

All I would ask for is a set of rules that somehow, magically I suppose, brings players to the table without any g&# d&@ned expectations of how the game is "supposed" to be played.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
yellowdingo wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:

For me the attraction of older games is the speed and simplicity. I'd like 0E speed with 4E production values, personally. I'd like fewer, simpler options with the customisation predominantly focussed on flavor material rather than mechanics.

I dont find rules terribly important, so there's nothing in that area of the game that I would consider a "must have".

So being able to be the Master Story Teller as DM or an active Participant in the Greatest Fantasy Novel written by you and your DM as a Player is more important than an overabundance of rules...

Would you prefer rules that allow you to build your own Setting? Like here is how you create an Artifact (with a list of powers. handicaps to choose from)?

You don't need Rules to build a setting. Settings are backdrop, rules are only about conducting the play within that backdrop. And as far as Artifacts go, I define Artifacts by how they break the rules.

When it comes to storytelling type games, I think White Wolf's Storyteller system is a good benchmark on cinematic style roleplaying with a minimum amount of ruleset. Then again, Storyteller type systems aren't going to appeal to players who have an inherent distrust of GM's discretion.

Shadow Lodge

Steve Geddes wrote:
For me the attraction of older games is the speed and simplicity. I'd like 0E speed with 4E production values, personally. I'd like fewer, simpler options with the customisation predominantly focussed on flavor material rather than mechanics.

Have you given Frog God Game's Swords & Wizardry: Complete (or it's sister products from Mythmere Games, S&W: Core Rules or S&W: White Box) a look?


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Kthulhu wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
For me the attraction of older games is the speed and simplicity. I'd like 0E speed with 4E production values, personally. I'd like fewer, simpler options with the customisation predominantly focussed on flavor material rather than mechanics.
Have you given Frog God Game's Swords & Wizardry: Complete (or it's sister products from Mythmere Games, S&W: Core Rules or S&W: White Box) a look?

It's my game of choice at the moment. (So much so that I'm actually reading PDFs while I wait for my hardcopies to arrive which has pretty much never happened).


yellowdingo wrote:
Moving on from the inevitable wave that is 5th Edition. What would you do to simplify the Game down to a Home Play Role-play Game reminiscent of the 83 Red Box?

Play BECMI, B/X, or Labyrinth Lord.

Qadira

Kthulhu wrote:
Have you given Frog God Game's Swords & Wizardry: Complete (or it's sister products from Mythmere Games, S&W: Core Rules or S&W: White Box) a look?
Denim N Leather wrote:
Play BECMI, B/X, or Labyrinth Lord.

Nice to see some OSR love here. :)

Basic Fantasy Role-Playing is also awesome. It's a mix of the simplicity of B/X but with Race and Class separate like in AD&D. It's truly inspiring. Also, whenever the author updates the system, he puts up a changelog!


Basic Fantasy is pretty good; if I were looking to separate race/class I would just run the Advanced Edition Companion for Labyrinth Lord.

Qadira

Denim N Leather wrote:
Basic Fantasy is pretty good; if I were looking to separate race/class I would just run the Advanced Edition Companion for Labyrinth Lord.

I love the Advanced Edition Companion. B/X is by far my favourite of the legacy editions in terms of simplicity of mechanics, and the AEC builds upon those mechanics to bring the AD&D experience.

But at the same time I feel that Basic Fantasy is worthy of mention simply because it was one of the first OSR games ever made and while not directly based on any particular edition of the game does a hell of a good job emulating the old school feel.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Jerry Wright 307 wrote:

But one thing many years of GMing have taught me is that a game isn't worth running if it's assembled by committee.

You must have really hated 3.X and Pathfinder then. :)

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Gaming / D&D 4th Edition (and Beyond) / D&D 6th Edition All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.