Trying Fate or a Different System - Advice

[noblejohn]

We just finished the Kingmaker AP last night. So now we I am trying to decide what to do next - both system and AP.

I have read jade regent and am thinking of running that but will change it a lot to make it fun for me.

What I have found with role play and pathfinder specifically is that I enjoy the role play and the story more than combat. However it is the combat stats that drive the character creating and the excitement of advancing levels.

As GM I found it very challengin to run combats and to keep the moving. I have tried all kids of ideas to make the combats faster and easier and have posted here several times brainstorming ideas. But by the time we reach 14 level, I had a hard time motivating myself to learn all the new spells of the bad guys and trying to keep all the PCs in line with the rules. It became overwhelming and not as much fun as I would like.

In addition, because we only meet twice a month, I skip a ton in each module. I don't do any random encoutners, I just hit the high points. I need the game to keep moving and stay interesting.

So I am really torn now - Pathfinder is very well supported with the APs being so well written (even if I do change them a lot) and this community is awesome. Also, the idea of learning an entire new system, working out the FAQs and finding a module I like is also a bit overwhelming.

So what do you guys think - have you guys played another system you think would suit me so much better, or should I just run 'my version' of Pathfinder?

Thanks everyone

[mechaPoet]

You could try out Dungeon World. It's a kind of mix between Apocalypse World and D&D. It's less mechanically complex than Pathfinder, with a more narratively driven system. I haven't played it myself, but I own it, and I know some friends who like it. And coming from Pathfinder, I think it would be easier to transition to than something like Fate, the former having more mechanical similarities (to do something that requires rules to resolve, e.g., fighting or casting a spell or whatever, roll a d12, add your bonuses and penalties, see if you got the right number). It's also got a much nicer XP system that stays in the low numbers and gives you XP for narrative actions (including gaining 1 XP anytime you fail a roll).

I think it's simultaneously more and less flexible than Pathfinder. For instance, weapon damage is based on class rather than weapon, so I like that I can build a fighter I've always wanted to build who uses her fists (or some fist weapons) who is exactly as effective as a fighter wielding a B.F. sword. Then again, the multiclassing is FAR more limited, with most classes having the ability to only grab one or two things from the others. And a wizard with a really high strength still only does 1d4 damage. So it creates a sort of narrative rich roleplaying experience at the expense of a more granular mechanical character creation.

[Kage_no_Oukami]

When I first got into gaming, my group was playing a (modified) Fate system. I haven't tried out the newest rules set yet. Having come into gaming with the smaller, more narrative based systems I certainly know where you're coming from. The biggest issue we tended to have with Fate was that players that are used to d20 typically like to see those numbers rising as they level up, but when you're working with Fudge dice and scale, that growth can be a bit more finite and some may feel it's slower than they like. Of course, this varies from player to player and group to group. And while you may not have to keep track of the more advanced things, Fate generally works more as a toolbox than the strictly defined rules that Pathfinder gives so it could be important to plan some things out with your group beforehand (such as how're going to be using magic and what skills are available etc). If making a drastic system change like this, I'd certainly get the two-cents of the players.

[Rerednaw]

Played and run both FATE and Dungeon World.

FATE emphasizes narrative (story-telling) above anything else. There's very little crunch at all. If your group enjoys optimization debates, rolling huge piles of dice...then this system is problematical. If one or more of the players is not good at telling his story or improvisation, well basically roleplaying, et al it's going to be rough.

DW also emphasizes narrative, but there is a bit more crunch. It's also modeled around more traditional DND trope (fighter, mage, cleric, rogue, etc.) as established class roles.

So between the two I'd probably recommend DW as a easier transition.

In both cases you've got your work cut out for you in terms of converting.

Neither system has the 'scads of sourcebooks/statblock' syndrome, so you'll be working mostly from scratch. Granted DW does have a very small section on common monsters.

Both systems have considerable online community support.

Good luck!

[noblejohn]

I am really torn and going back and forth on what to do....I may just need to really commit to learning Pathfinder rules...that may solve my frustation.

The last battle we had there was this gaseous cloud floating around, the players were at 14th level and keeping track of the rules was a little stressful. I may need to make the players take more ownership for rules...

I am reading up on Jade Regent and like the worlds and some of the story arch, although I am drastically changing the NPC role and moving it over to the players...

Thanks for the posts.

[Rerednaw]

noblejohn wrote:

I am really torn and going back and forth on what to do....I may just need to really commit to learning Pathfinder rules...that may solve my frustation.

The last battle we had there was this gaseous cloud floating around, the players were at 14th level and keeping track of the rules was a little stressful. I may need to make the players take more ownership for rules...

I am reading up on Jade Regent and like the worlds and some of the story arch, although I am drastically changing the NPC role and moving it over to the players...

Thanks for the posts.

14+? Yah welcome to the joys of high-level crunchiness :)

Dunno if this would help but our group uses index cards to keep track of various status effects. Our group also uses little plastic tokens with "dazed, stunned, prone" etc. that we place next to a given mini. There are both store-bought and player-made versions of cards and tokens that have the effects of a given status on them directly.

And I'm not sure how much rules you are trying to do but at any time a player should be able to give you details of their one character while you are running a dozen or more :)

But back to topic yes if you want less crunch you pretty much have to drop d20.

Never give up! Never surrender! :)

[Thorkull]

noblejohn wrote:

I am really torn and going back and forth on what to do....I may just need to really commit to learning Pathfinder rules...that may solve my frustation.

I found, way back when 3.0 was in beta, that learning the system is best accomplished by knowing the basics and adding complexity and detail on top of it.

You can't expect to know every spell and every ability right away. Take the time to play through the lower levels. You mentioned that you skipped random encounters and the like, but that's causing you to jump ahead in the progression scale in complexity in the system. To learn a complex rule set, you need to take time to learn it and reinforce the lessons learned.

You're going to have a really hard time adjudicating the way 3 different 8th-level spells interact if you're still having to think through how AoOs from movement work, for example. Either as a player or GM, your system mastery is going to be based on experience. You won't remember how black tentacles works until you've used it a dozen times or so.

Give yourself time, and don't jump ahead.

[Kodger]

Look up E6 and E8 on these messageboards. They are Pathfinder variants that end at levels six or eight. After that, PCs progress by gaining feats.