paizo.com Recent Posts in First Session, first PF gamepaizo.com Recent Posts in First Session, first PF game2012-06-29T06:09:33Z2012-06-29T06:09:33ZRe: Forums: Beginner Box: First Session, first PF gameS'monhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2odi9?First-Session-first-PF-game#82012-07-02T09:17:53Z2012-07-02T09:17:53Z<p>"AoO seem to be a major factor that pushes PF into the tactical board game type of experience, but it seems to me that 4e does this better. Leaving AoO out just seems to enhance the aspects that makes 3.5/PF shine."</p>
<p>That certainly fits my experience, yup.</p>"AoO seem to be a major factor that pushes PF into the tactical board game type of experience, but it seems to me that 4e does this better. Leaving AoO out just seems to enhance the aspects that makes 3.5/PF shine."
That certainly fits my experience, yup.S'mon2012-07-02T09:17:53ZRe: Forums: Beginner Box: First Session, first PF gameLacanhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2odi9?First-Session-first-PF-game#72012-07-01T00:35:19Z2012-07-01T00:35:19Z<p>I played 3.x on and off for a few years, took a hiatus, then came back to 4e, and played that for about 2 years. </p>
<p>As a tactical board game, 4e just seemed to have better options for players "on the grid". Granted battles were long, but it didn't matter if the battles were fun. </p>
<p>But, imo, 3.5/PF is a better game to facilitate a "role playing" type of experience (this is merely my opinion, and I know plenty of folks will differ on this matter). I'm saying this because, AoO seem to be a major factor that pushes PF into the tactical board game type of experience, but it seems to me that 4e does this better. Leaving AoO out just seems to enhance the aspects that makes 3.5/PF shine. </p>
<p>Again, only my opinion. I love all editions of our classic RPG for what they do well.</p>I played 3.x on and off for a few years, took a hiatus, then came back to 4e, and played that for about 2 years.
As a tactical board game, 4e just seemed to have better options for players "on the grid". Granted battles were long, but it didn't matter if the battles were fun.
But, imo, 3.5/PF is a better game to facilitate a "role playing" type of experience (this is merely my opinion, and I know plenty of folks will differ on this matter). I'm saying this because, AoO seem to be a major...Lacan2012-07-01T00:35:19ZRe: Forums: Beginner Box: First Session, first PF gameS'monhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2odi9?First-Session-first-PF-game#62012-06-30T15:01:44Z2012-06-30T15:01:44Z<p>"I am thinking about leaving AoO out of the game, just cause it seemed to work so well with BB"</p>
<p>Running BB for the first time, it was a revelation to me how much faster and more fluid the game is without AoOs.</p>"I am thinking about leaving AoO out of the game, just cause it seemed to work so well with BB"
Running BB for the first time, it was a revelation to me how much faster and more fluid the game is without AoOs.S'mon2012-06-30T15:01:44ZRe: Forums: Beginner Box: First Session, first PF gameLacanhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2odi9?First-Session-first-PF-game#52012-06-30T00:43:47Z2012-06-30T00:43:47Z<p>Sean,</p>
<p>Thanks for the reply. One of the reasons I switched to PF was because, I consider the staff interaction with players an important element of great game design. </p>
<p>Thanks for clarifying your thoughts on AoO (or lack of) in BB. Part of my issue, was clearly my own issue, because I read somewhere that BB "doesn't let you do things that would normally provoke an AoO" and I didn't read through the exception. I had mentioned I had only spent about 10 mins with the books before the game, in order to test out how quickly we could get the game started. </p>
<p>To your credit and to the credit of the team, the players and I had a lot of fun. I heard from most of them today and they wanted to schedule another session. I left my HB copy of the Core Rules Book as a teaser. But I think you have some new customers. </p>
<p>Huppoltan,</p>
<p>I'm looking forward to getting them into the Core Rules. I am thinking about leaving AoO out of the game, just cause it seemed to work so well with BB. I agree that having APG, ARG and the Ultimate books, would probably be to much for the first campaign, but I think I'm allow players to "respec" as long as there character narrative maintains a level of fidelity. Which allows us to buy books, read them, and use what we want at a reasonable pace. That way we all win. Paizo makes some money, players expand their choices, and I get more high quality books for my book shelf.</p>Sean,
Thanks for the reply. One of the reasons I switched to PF was because, I consider the staff interaction with players an important element of great game design.
Thanks for clarifying your thoughts on AoO (or lack of) in BB. Part of my issue, was clearly my own issue, because I read somewhere that BB "doesn't let you do things that would normally provoke an AoO" and I didn't read through the exception. I had mentioned I had only spent about 10 mins with the books before the game, in...Lacan2012-06-30T00:43:47ZRe: Forums: Beginner Box: First Session, first PF gameHuppolitanhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2odi9?First-Session-first-PF-game#42012-06-29T18:20:22Z2012-06-29T18:20:22Z<p>It sounds like you had a great first session. As your players make their first characters beyond the Box, you might consider limiting their options to the Core Rulebook . . . too much choice can be paralyzing, and there is plenty in that rust-red tome to play around with. Of course, play as you wish. All the best as you continue with the hobby!</p>It sounds like you had a great first session. As your players make their first characters beyond the Box, you might consider limiting their options to the Core Rulebook . . . too much choice can be paralyzing, and there is plenty in that rust-red tome to play around with. Of course, play as you wish. All the best as you continue with the hobby!Huppolitan2012-06-29T18:20:22ZRe: Forums: Beginner Box: First Session, first PF gameSean K Reynolds (Contributor)https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2odi9?First-Session-first-PF-game#32012-07-11T03:04:36Z2012-06-29T18:07:56Z<p>Lacan,</p>
<p>I'm glad you enjoyed the Beginner Box. I'll address some of your comments.</p>
<p>Yes, the ACs for the goblin encounter are a little high. Goblins are dodgy little jerks and it's hard to squish them... but fortunately they don't do much damage. And that's an encounter the PCs can bypass by talking, so it's okay if it's not a cakewalk to finish (the PCs have an incentive to avoid a fight).</p>
<p>The premade characters are supposed to be not optimized characters. We don't expect players to be skilled at minmaxing their characters, so the example characters are built pretty average. This has two benefits:
<br />
(1) When we test encounters, we use the pregenerated iconics, and if the iconics can handle the encounter, that indicates a group of average characters can handle that encounter. Otherwise, if we built the iconics optimally and tested encounters against that power level, people using average characters would be likely to lose.
<br />
(2) If a player first plays a premade iconic, then creates his or her own character that's more powerful than the premade, that gives the player a sense of accomplishment and system mastery. It's a reward for reading the game and understanding how it fits together. After all, we wouldn't want their first character to be so optimized that their second character feels weak by comparison.</p>
<p>The game doesn't have AOOs at all, for the most part and it doesn't let you do things that would normally provoke an AOO (with some exceptions). For example, in the Beginner Box rules, you can't fire a bow when adjacent to an enemy. Likewise, you can't cast a spell when adjacent to an enemy... with the exception of touch spells, which are allowed. And there aren't AOO-type limitations on movement (because restricting it would be hard to explain in an understandable way, and would really limit what PCs can do in combat).
<br />
That way, when you play the Beginner Box and transition to the Core Rulebook, the GM can say, "Remember how you used to not be able to do X at all? Well, now you can, but there's a risk if you want to try it." Giving players more options as they increase their experience with the game is better than taking away options as they play more.</p>
<p>Or, as you put it, "who gives a crap, let them do it." :) The full game is a pretty complex game, and if you eliminate some of that complexity to maintain the amount of fun, that's a win. :)</p>Lacan,
I'm glad you enjoyed the Beginner Box. I'll address some of your comments.
Yes, the ACs for the goblin encounter are a little high. Goblins are dodgy little jerks and it's hard to squish them... but fortunately they don't do much damage. And that's an encounter the PCs can bypass by talking, so it's okay if it's not a cakewalk to finish (the PCs have an incentive to avoid a fight).
The premade characters are supposed to be not optimized characters. We don't expect players to be...Sean K Reynolds (Contributor)2012-06-29T18:07:56ZRe: Forums: Beginner Box: First Session, first PF gameLacanhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2odi9?First-Session-first-PF-game#22012-06-29T06:28:14Z2012-06-29T06:28:14Z<p>Additional thoughts:</p>
<p>The battle mat is awesome. I'm going to get some more from Paizo. The premades seemed slight under-powered for my taste. I usually use 20pt buy. In theory the pawns are a great idea, but I couldn't getting to mix well with plastic minis. </p>
<p>The game system is a great intro for new players, except I wasn't sure if I was suppose to not let them take actions/movements that would normally provoke AoO, or if I was suppose to ignore AoO and let them do what they wanted. </p>
<p>I noticed that not thinking about AoOs really made the combats faster and allowed me to manage the tension within a fight a lot better. But when I was tempted to not let players move, because that movement would provoke, I had an odd feeling. 1) that that sort of thinking was abstractly technical and 2) who gives a crap, just let them do it. Ultimately everyone gets a swing, and enemies were typicially smart enough to know, they should do whatever it takes to get the flank. And because the really needed the +2 flank bonus, I needed them to get that tactical advantage, just to keep the game moving.</p>Additional thoughts:
The battle mat is awesome. I'm going to get some more from Paizo. The premades seemed slight under-powered for my taste. I usually use 20pt buy. In theory the pawns are a great idea, but I couldn't getting to mix well with plastic minis.
The game system is a great intro for new players, except I wasn't sure if I was suppose to not let them take actions/movements that would normally provoke AoO, or if I was suppose to ignore AoO and let them do what they wanted.
I...Lacan2012-06-29T06:28:14ZForums: Beginner Box: First Session, first PF gameLacanhttps://paizo.com/threads/rzs2odi9?First-Session-first-PF-game#12012-06-29T06:09:33Z2012-06-29T06:09:33Z<p>Got the box in the mail yesterday. Popped it open, was very impressed by the production quality, as well as the density of box. </p>
<p>I had only skimmed over the "Black Fang" adventure in the GM's Handbook. But I was confident enough in my xp as a GM to basically wing it. And the box was sold to me on the fact that it should be able to get quickly going right out of the box without a deep reading. </p>
<p>We had four players, only one of which had played TTRPG to any extent at all. He and I would both be considered rusty. The three new players used the premades, the Cleric, Fighter and Rogue. The other rolled his own sorcerer, which we shoe horned in BB rules. The power level was even across the board. </p>
<p>[Spoiler omitted]</p>
<p>All in all, it was a fun game, with perhaps 10 mins of prep time. </p>
<p>Review (or things to note):
<br />
After playing in a couple 4e campaign if felt that with the later encounters, starting with the five goblins, the enemy AC seemed a bit to high (unless I'm doing something wrong). AC: 16. The fighter had +4 to hit, which was the best in the group, rogue was +1 (+3 range, with no precise shot), cleric was +1. Even with flanks most the PCs we're not hitting 50% of the time. Granted combat in PFBB is a lot faster than 4e, but still, I can recall 3 whole rounds were the PC were hitting no one, even with flanks. Bad rolls, I know, bad enough they might not have hit AC: 12, but still, it wasn't building tension. It was just sort of annoying. The battle starting taking long enough I subtracted a hit point or two, so that they were one-shoting, just to keep excitement alive. I still try to keep it so they are hitting mooks around 55-60% of the time. Players just have more fun when that is the case. </p>
<p>NPC damage level was great though, 1-2 points was my average roll on a 1d4, and they felt the sting, since it took a while to hit something. </p>
<p>The pawns are a bit to tall to mix with the prepainted minis from Wizards or WizKids. I was standing, so I could see, but the players that were sitting, had a hard time figuring out who was who and who was where. One solutions is to not mix them, but I think I read/heard from Paizo was that the idea was to be able to use both. </p>
<p>On the good side, combat was really fast. I think we'll leave AoO out, even after we transition to the Core Rule Book. </p>
<p>The basic options were easy to explain to new players. I think once we get to Core they will appreciate the plethora of options Paizo has developed since CRB release.</p>Got the box in the mail yesterday. Popped it open, was very impressed by the production quality, as well as the density of box.
I had only skimmed over the "Black Fang" adventure in the GM's Handbook. But I was confident enough in my xp as a GM to basically wing it. And the box was sold to me on the fact that it should be able to get quickly going right out of the box without a deep reading.
We had four players, only one of which had played TTRPG to any extent at all. He and I would both be...Lacan2012-06-29T06:09:33Z