| Superturk |
Hello everyone,
My weekly gaming group plays DnD 4th edition, and have ever since we got together. It's the first table top role-playing game I have ever played, but since I play World of Warcraft it was so easy to learn and get into...it's like a pen and paper version of my favorite game of all time.
Anyway, a member of my group brought his Pathfinder book over tonight and after the session, where we finally finished a campaign we had been working on for the last six months, and asked if we could play Pathfinder next. I scanned through the book and was not really interested, it looks so...complicated and bland.
In fourth edition every class has its own set of unique powers, but the only classes with really cool powers in Pathfinder was the magical classes. Also, it looks like every build would be exactly the same in Pathfinder whereas in DnD 4e there are nearly unlimited options for character builds and the game doesn't stop at level 20 like Pathfinder does. For example, the rogue in DnD has so many options available to it and literally pages of powers to choose from, but with the Pathfinder rogue the options are much more limited, plus to be really powerful you have to pick up a prestige class, it's like...the base classes are not good enough on their own, you have to get this class to be really good. I mean, how do you define a character without these powers? With the exception of spellcasters, none of the other classes are really anything--they are just kinda there and adrift with no real purpose.
Also, with DnD 4e we have minis to represent everything, but there are no concrete rules in Pathfinder that I could find for using the minis in the game, so on that front it feels like Pathfinder is only half complete, what is gaming without having to use the minis--I can't imagine doing combat without the map and minis. Also, I love the skill challenge mechanic, it makes using skills feel like you are acomplishing something, but with Pathfinder I really can't find the point of ever using...
Ha ha very funny, how gullable do you think people are?
Nice idea listing all the bad parts of 4e and then saying they are the best parts....blah blah blah
Okay well, if we use this as an opening to debate...
I think Pathfinder is the best version of D&D yet. I have played them all since about 1980. 4th Edition is a fun, easy to run game but having tried it for about 12 months, I have jumped ship and gone to Pathfinder.
The thing that makes Pathfinder so good are the 'Adventure Paths'. There are plenty of good systems out there, with enough mechanical variety to please most people from rules lite rpgs like 'Savage Worlds' to the more involved and mathematical games such as 'Rolemaster'. Once you have found a level of crunch that you get on with it is all about the story, setting the scene within the players imagination and creating excitement and momentum. A talented DM/GM can do this themselves but some folk without time or maybe ability need a helping hand from time to time and that is where modules and such can be so great if done properly. Paizo does them properly. I just got the 'Kingmaker' Adventure Path 31 to run and it is sublime. That is why Pathfinder is better than D&D 4th Edition and any other game at the moment...not because of rules (who cares really how you come to decide that a sword hits a goblin as long as it is an enjoyable process) but because it has the best support to make playing and running the game as easy and rewarding as possible.
This is my first post, probably my last. Hope you are all well. Don't bite my head off if you don't agree, it's not my fault if you are wrong lol.
Cheers.