|
I recenally got sick of pc gaming. The games were just getting old and nothing new. i spend my money only to find the product sucks. So i decided to look at some thing new, I decided on table top rpg gaming, specifically D&D 4E.
Being the unhinged, shoot before I look, nut job that I am I went and bought the core books, a books of small adventures to run, three quest line modules, and a but load of dungeon tiles. I dove in like a maniac before even playing the game.
I got all my 4E materials, and began to pore over them. Then I found Pathfinder.Once again, being the unhinged, shoot before I look, nut job that I am I went and bought the pathfinder core book.
So there I was with a whole bunch of D&D 4E books, as well as the pathfinder core book. This is all very recent, like only a few weeks.
My whole point comes down to this. after beginning my reading of both products i have come to the conclusion that the people who wrote pathfinder are far better writers than the ones who wrote 4E.
I can barely stomach reading the 4E player handbook. While the pathfinder book read so much more smoothly.
Only problem now is that i have a whole bunch of D&D 4E books to deal with.
Only problem now is that i have a whole bunch of D&D 4E books to deal with.
Nuke them from orbit.
It's the only way to be sure.
Only problem now is that i have a whole bunch of D&D 4E books to deal with.Nuke them from orbit.
It's the only way to be sure.
Heh.
No doubt, you just missed my Kingmaker campaign by a couple of weeks...just another reason to hate 4E :)
Where in MA? I live in and run some games in Worcester (3.x, Pathfinder, and 4e).
BTW, the 4e core books aren't meant to be read cover to cover. the rules of the 4e game have been simplified after a backlash of 3.x (the rules Pathfinder was based on) and only take up the last hundred or so pages. Because of the powers system you can read the intro pages of each class and skip 30 or so pages until the next class and so on. That doesn't make anybody a better writer, it's just how the rules are presented.
Both systems have advantages and disadvantages, and how they read vs how they play are different in many regards. I recommend that if you ever have a chance to play a few sessions of 4E under a decent dm then take the opportunity, but if Pathfinder is catching your interest more than give it a shot.
Try Meetup.com to look for gaming groups. There is probably and rpg or dnd meetup group in Boston (I'm not sure where you are in Mass), and that can be a good way to hook up with gamers for face to face gaming.
|
Also i got to find a game. the only games I can find are up in Vermont,a couple hours away. I am in Mass. None of my friends play any kind of table top rpg.
I'm in MA as well. Go to the PFNE Yahoo group if you are interested in trying Pathfinder via our Pathfinder Society OP games. We get together in a few different places including: Franklin, Boston and Bridgewater.
Welcome to Pathfinder!
|
|
4E is not a bad system. It has its strengths and its drawbacks. It's okay to have a preference, but I would advise anyone to not dismiss 4E out of hand. It has some real design strengths that I wish Pathfinder had, in some respects.
But in my opinion, what it comes down to is not the system - it's the adventures.
If Paizo had gone 4E, I'd be playing 4E, not 3.5 (Though admittedly, with some complaints about the frequency of WotC's release of accessory rules so often that they break compatiblity with Paizo's published adventures).
But Paizo didn't go with 4E and instead renovated 3.5. It still has some problems that are inherent to 3.xx. The 15 minute adventuring day and significant inbalance between the classes being the big design flaws that 4E did remedy...
But Pathfinder RPG is a very good system just the same.
But for all that, the greatest strength to Pathfinder are the Adventure Paths that Paizo puts out. Paizo has come up with an excellent system in PFRPG, it's not hyped with monthly releases of yet enother book of rules so that their adventure paths still remain usable to GMs. CLEAR Advantage: Paizo.
In summary: the Edition Wars are a little over-hyped.
What isn't over-hyped is the sheer FUN and elegance of Paizo's adventures. Nobody does it better. And to ride that ride best, you have to be running Pathfinder.
Welcome to the forums! I'm glad you started this thread. I will be moving to Billerica on Tuesday so thanks for the heads up on the New England gaming group Githzilla. Once I get settled, I'll look over the games offered and perhaps see you both soon in a New England gaming group.
Welcome to the boards! Have some cookies!
Welcome aboard!
|
|
I tried playing 4e and just couldn't get into it (YMMV). That being said, if you're leaning toward pathfinder, you're leaning in a good direction.
My biggest complaint about 4e--no negatives on ability scores (sounds petty, i know, but c'mon how can you throw that out?) and the healing surges and whatnot...it seemed to play more like a pen & paper MMO than D&D. Had they released it as something else other than D&D I probably would have given it a fair shake...it just doesn't feel like D&D to me.
Hehe, I bought 10 4E books before I found Pathfinder. To be honest I'm here because of two webcomics. Chronicles of Loth reminded me how much versatility 4E had lost in comparison to 3.X (and that WotC seemingly doesn't intend to get anywhere near that again) and made me revert to 3.5. Goblins mentioned that there was a "Weapon Proficiency: Furniture" in Pathfinder, so I looked it up, bought the core book, then the Bestiary, then the adventure with the rules for hellknights, then I started downloading stuff. I'm addicted, weeeeee!^^
Only problem now is that i have a whole bunch of D&D 4E books to deal with.
Welcome!
I only tried 4E very briefly. I did not like the system, the world nor the adventures. From then on I was firmly in the PF camp. My 11 year old son plays 4E and enjoys it quite a lot, so basically it comes down to preference and experience.
Being a GM i don't think I would use any 4E material. Compared to PF adventures, the ones I have seen from WotC are not very interesting, and too much hastle to convert. Paizo has a great line of Adventure Paths (campaigns), modules (stand alone adventures and Pathfinder Society scenarios (one nighters), that are well written, need no conversion and are very affordable (more so if you by them online as PDFs).
If I where you I would get my hand on the Pathfinder Bestiary and the first volume of Council of Thieves (AP #25) - I have not played that particular AP yet but it is the first one to make full use of the PRPG core rules and is a very straight forward adventure. Alternately you can pick up AP #31 (the first installment of the Kingmaker AP) which is also very easy to run and can be broken down inte small easy to get started with adventures/quests.
Give a real PF adventure a spin and maybe later when you have more GMing experience you will decide to convert your 4E material.
EDIT: Be open and positive about RP gaming with your friends and maybe some of them can be convinced to start a RPG group with you.
Being a GM i don't think I would use any 4E material.
There's one thing I like about the 4th edition. That's the epic destinies. Some of them could really be great when converted to Pathfinder.
Welcome aboard.
If your friends are still addicted to so called "online fantasy games" (where you actually need a lot of fantasy to see the fantasy in those games) you should invite them to a round of good ole Pathfinder.
Grab an Adventure Path Module (Kingmaker is best ever imho) and let them run the pregen chars - with any luck you will have them hooked.
As for 4e, I like it - but more as a kind of fantasy tabletop battle interrupted by small bouts of roleplaying (glorified "Descent"/"Runebound"/Talisman" boardgame style), for that it's great.
For "real" Roleplaying Pathfinder is much better imho, as it has the much better adventures and the system forces Roleplaying much more, but, being basically a streamlined but still compatible DD3.5, it's also much harder on the GM to run.
Also if you are a compulsive buyer I would advise you strongly to steer clear of D&D Minis. Do never ever look at the singles that Paizo sells here for your absolute convenience. You also should never fantasize about how much more awesome your encounters could be with them - really, like, never :)
It is a bit of shame 4e did have a bunch of terrible adventures with it. They seem obsessed with the 'encounter' (and its set up, environement etc) rather than an overall 'plot'
They did some good stuff with the new rules set, and some bad stuff too
PF has done some good stuff with 3.5, and some stuff im still not keen on
its a combination of
-disappointed with 4e
-some nice tweak in PF
-quality of Paizo adventures
that means PF is my 'crunchy' fantasy rpg of choice
I hope the OP gets a chance to play soon....and i wish i had the cash he does to splash out on games!!
|
Greets Triga!
Have some of Lillith's cookies, and enjoy the game. If you run into questions these forums will knock your socks off with the immediate response time. Writers, contributors and Paizo folks are all over the place giving 'official' answers and some of the intent behind their modules. That's been the best thing in the world to me about the PF system. If you decide to GM a game check the adventure path forums for the adventure. Invariably, there's a wealth of info about the encounters and some of the odd things that players can do in certain situations. It's a 'Cliff Notes' for your adbenture.
...That's been the best thing in the world to me about the PF system. If you decide to GM a game check the adventure path forums for the adventure. ...
A HUGE difference between WotC and Paizo.
At Paizo you have both an enthusiastic comminity of gamers, who will actually get out of their way to help fellow Pathfinders, and an incredible staff of dedicated designers/writers/what-nots who periodically check in and participate in discussions clarify rules as best their schedule permits them. Its actually written in all their job descriptions that they have to put in a certain amount of times for online community work.
|
Also if you are a compulsive buyer I would advise you strongly to steer clear of D&D Minis. Do never ever look at the singles that Paizo sells here for your absolute convenience. You also should never fantasize about how much more awesome your encounters could be with them - really, like, never :)
Bad pazonian you know if you tell ppl not to do something its the first thing they do no reverse psychology on the boards (unless ur james jacobs)
To the op welcome
I recenally got sick of pc gaming. The games were just getting old and nothing new. i spend my money only to find the product sucks. So i decided to look at some thing new, I decided on table top rpg gaming, specifically D&D 4E.
Being the unhinged, shoot before I look, nut job that I am I went and bought the core books, a books of small adventures to run, three quest line modules, and a but load of dungeon tiles. I dove in like a maniac before even playing the game.
I got all my 4E materials, and began to pore over them. Then I found Pathfinder.Once again, being the unhinged, shoot before I look, nut job that I am I went and bought the pathfinder core book.
So there I was with a whole bunch of D&D 4E books, as well as the pathfinder core book. This is all very recent, like only a few weeks.
My whole point comes down to this. after beginning my reading of both products i have come to the conclusion that the people who wrote pathfinder are far better writers than the ones who wrote 4E.
I can barely stomach reading the 4E player handbook. While the pathfinder book read so much more smoothly.
Only problem now is that i have a whole bunch of D&D 4E books to deal with.
There is Ebay, or if you have an FLGS then you can sell them there. Even if you have them at a discount you could get some of the money back.
Hello!
I like both systems :3
*IDORT*
I recenally got sick of pc gaming. The games were just getting old and nothing new. i spend my money only to find the product sucks. So i decided to look at some thing new, I decided on table top rpg gaming, specifically D&D 4E.
Being the unhinged, shoot before I look, nut job that I am I went and bought the core books, a books of small adventures to run, three quest line modules, and a but load of dungeon tiles. I dove in like a maniac before even playing the game.
I got all my 4E materials, and began to pore over them. Then I found Pathfinder.Once again, being the unhinged, shoot before I look, nut job that I am I went and bought the pathfinder core book.
So there I was with a whole bunch of D&D 4E books, as well as the pathfinder core book. This is all very recent, like only a few weeks.
My whole point comes down to this. after beginning my reading of both products i have come to the conclusion that the people who wrote pathfinder are far better writers than the ones who wrote 4E.
I can barely stomach reading the 4E player handbook. While the pathfinder book read so much more smoothly.
Only problem now is that i have a whole bunch of D&D 4E books to deal with.
I did the same thing back when Patherfinder was in Beta.
I didn't find 4E to be a bad game just not what I was looking for when I bought it. Still we do play it from time to time. We play more like tactical combat game and really just ignore role playing. It works well for that.
For Pathfinder that's where we do out massive role playing, mysterious, problem solving, empire building games. Loving the new AP for the kingdom rules. It's sweet.
Now I do agree, the writing for 4E is sub par. Kind of dumbed down or written for young kids maybe. Not sure what it is but it just doesn't flow well. Still the game is fun in the right context.
Heh, I play both and like both as well. 4E is the preferred system for various quick games, while serious compaigns are played with PFRPG.
Anyway welcome to the forums!
P.S. Please no epic destinies that shove your character to some galaxy far far away. I can make up some ending for my PCs without ceding them to GM as NPC or somesuch....
|
|
Both systems have advantages and disadvantages, and how they read vs how they play are different in many regards.
I will echo this, the way an RPG reads and how it plays can vary wildly - I have heard several people say Savage Worlds Explorer's Edition was very dry to read (I actually thought it was okay) but it played great.
As you have already invested in the 4e books I would suggest at least giving it a go - and whether you play it as a full RPG with in-character speaking with social & investigative scenes, or as something just a bit more than a board game it can be a great game.
Personally, I think the 4e books are laid out in a much more referencable manner than PF, with each Race and Class beginning on a new page.
How they actually read, well 4e had loads of powers to read through which was a drag (but then reading through pages of spells is the same for me), but I don't remember it being a bad read. I can't comment on the PF core book as I could never be bothered to read my copy.
If you do give 4e a try and don't like it, its still a popular game so you should be able to sell your game books second hand fairly easily (if you really don't like it and its only been a week you might even try to return them for store credit - if you have a really friendly store).
If Pathfinder is your thing, then you will find a busy forum here with plenty of support from Paizo (there are some freebie PDFs you can download as well). It is a fairly good system, IMHO possibly better than D&D3.5 on which it is based, and if you haven't got the past experience of 3.5 to muddy the waters (like I have) it is a good RPG to get into.
|
|
Another thing for the OP to consider is that you don't actually have to choose one or the other, you could play both Pathfinder and 4e! Each has their strengths and are different enough that playing one and then the other can be a nice change of pace.
Although I am not pursuing Pathfinder RPG, I do still intend to play/GM both D&D3.5 and 4e
4e is nicely streamlined and easy to GM, but it is sometimes too streamlined for me and doesn't lend itself well to whittling away a party's resources (HP mainly) over a number of days. So I also like to turn to 3.5 that allows greater degree of modification of characters (at the expense of some more complexity) and can be easily used to promote a more "gritty" experience than 4e IMHO.
For "real" Roleplaying Pathfinder is much better imho, as it has the much better adventures and the system forces Roleplaying much more
I am sure I was "really" roleplaying when I was playing 4e last :). But anyway I am curious - what particular aspects of the PF system do you feel actually "forces" roleplaying much more?
I have always felt a system couldn't "force" roleplaying, though it might "promote" or "encourage" it, but then I am not sure PF has anything over 4e even in that regard; so I am curious whether I have missed something in PF (and even 3.5).
Pulls up a chair sits down gets out the popcorn - I actually missed the Edition Wars, I think I was playing Vampire at the time and didn't really care. People keep talking about how it was a bloodbath - no doubt the usual suspects will turn up and in passive aggressive language try and browbeat people into accepting their opinion that one game is far more superior than the other or how its wrong to dislike one game blah blah blah..
They are games people not politics or religion, so put the soap boxes away get down off that tall horse and remember the most important thing about this community - we are here to have fun.
That said
Welcome to the Paizo boards enjoy!
|
|
The more highly structured a system is, the more it discourages role play and encourages tactical sim. On one far extreme, you've got accounting (highly structured/little role play) on the other end you've got improv theater (highly unstructured/lots of role play).
I'm not quite sure I agree with this 100% but I can sort of see where you're coming from.
To me though, its more a case of the greater the amount of concentration and time spent on dealing with the mechanics the less you can concentrate and spend time on roleplaying.
For example in conflict resolution systems where a single dice roll can determine the outcome of a fight (e.g. Don't Rest Your Head) the player and GM can spend more time narrating how the conflict actually played out.
But for task resolution systems like PF and 4e, narrating every single action could seriously slow down the entire game - which is why I encourage quick narration of every few actions, focusing on more detailed narration of more significant actions - be it downing the main bad guy, casting a big spell (a Daily in 4e) etc.
4e is much more structured than 3x. That's why it probably makes a good tactical sim, but not so good at role play.
Given that for some people 4e actually is more streamlined in play than PF or 3.5, it could be argued that for some people 4e may actually provide more time to conentrate on roleplaying.
Either way, for investigative and social scenes where mechanics may take a back seat you can roleplay equally well in both a PF or a 4e game (both have consolidated some skills like Search, Spot and Listen so dice rolls are quicker when needed).
Some people have argued 4e's Skill Challenge system repalces roleplaying, but I would argue against that. Skill Challenges can be used for other encounters than just social (e.g. chases etc) and even in a social situation the players having to think what skills their characters excel at can prompt innovative approaches to discussions (using History to show past examples). It can also encourage the whole party to get involved rather than just leaving it to the PC with the best Diplomacy modifier.
And in all cases, just like in PF, the skills can be rolled in addition to in-character talking (with a bonus given if desired for really good roleplaying).
Anyway, apologies for dragging this off-topic! :)
I see nothing wrong with a discussion or even a debate on comparative game design philosophy. Having said that, though, such a debate without mutual respect quickly becomes a war. It's just a game. Our lives aren't defined by it. Mutual respect should be easy.
I have no problem with a healthy discussion on game design and philosophy. The Gamer Life section is probably a more appropriate area. Sadly I think people have a tendency to get overly defensive about their favourite game and the interesting discussion is lost for the waffle about how much better one persons favourite game is than everybody else's.
|
|
I have no problem with a healthy discussion on game design and philosophy. The Gamer Life section is probably a more appropriate area. Sadly I think people have a tendency to get overly defensive about their favourite game and the interesting discussion is lost for the waffle about how much better one persons favourite game is than everybody else's.
I see nothing wrong with a discussion or even a debate on comparative game design philosophy. Having said that, though, such a debate without mutual respect quickly becomes a war. It's just a game. Our lives aren't defined by it. Mutual respect should be easy.
Yeah! Don't knock my Hello Kitty Island Adventure, ya hear?!?!?!
Yeah! Don't knock my Hello Kitty Island Adventure, ya hear?!?!?!I have no problem with a healthy discussion on game design and philosophy. The Gamer Life section is probably a more appropriate area. Sadly I think people have a tendency to get overly defensive about their favourite game and the interesting discussion is lost for the waffle about how much better one persons favourite game is than everybody else's.
I see nothing wrong with a discussion or even a debate on comparative game design philosophy. Having said that, though, such a debate without mutual respect quickly becomes a war. It's just a game. Our lives aren't defined by it. Mutual respect should be easy.
If I had my way my group would be playing Rifts, Rolemaster or GURPS Horseclans as well as PFRPG.
...
2.) I'm not worried about 4e's impact on roleplaying in non-initiative time. I'm worried about it's impact on roleplay in initiative time. Do I do action "x", action "y", or action "z"? Well, I already spent my z-power, action-y won't give me the mechanical bonus I want, so I'll use my x-power. That's not roleplaying. Contrast with, "my character is flashy and daring, he'll do 'a'".
Actually it's a shame that there are a few things that got buried somewhere where nobody will look for them.
Please see Saying Yes p. 28 and Actions the Rules Don't Cover p. 42 of the 4E DMG. There aren't the set-in stone rules, but the game has a (rather well hidden) mechanism to do 'a' and be cool. Unfortunately this is one of the things that would be good to be at least mentioned somewhere in the PHB, on a place where it will catch the attention of a causal reader.
|
|
I will echo this, the way an RPG reads and how it plays can vary wildly
Interestingly I just noticed a thread on RPG.net that debates how 4e reads versus how it plays, I don't normally link from one forum to the next but it might be of interest to the OP.
Thread: [4E] Which parts "Play Better than They Read" for you?
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=517637
|
|
Now, a couple of points.
1.) "streamlined" can only happen with structure. Being streamlined doesn't help roleplay, it hurts it. Massively restrictive (ie. Streamlined) systems interfere with the "stream of consciousness" which is so important to roleplay.
I think we will have to agree to disagree - streamlining to me can mean cutting away extraneous content so that you focus on what is really important. It may be at the expense of a little realism, or choice, and occassionally the ability to roleplay, but it doesn't necessitate any of those.
For example, dropping Spell Resistence, Concealment Miss Chances etc means 4e cuts out an extra dice roll in some places. The Grab manouevre, while not quite what I would like from a grapple mechanic is so much easier in 4e than PF's grapple. And both PF and 4e streamline the "spotting an ambush" scenario compared to 3.5 by combining Spot and Listen into Perception and Move Silently and Hide into Stealth.
2.) I'm not worried about 4e's impact on roleplaying in non-initiative time. I'm worried about it's impact on roleplay in initiative time.
If that is the case, I don't think you can generalise what happens in combat to the whole of the game. Even if your assertion was fact and 4e did categorically reduce roleplaying in "initiative time", that would not mean it wasn't a roleplaying game if it didn't impinge on roleplaying out of initiative time.
Do I do action "x", action "y", or action "z"? Well, I already spent my z-power, action-y won't give me the mechanical bonus I want, so I'll use my x-power. That's not roleplaying. Contrast with, "my character is flashy and daring, he'll do 'a'".
I can't see what in 4e would stop someone thinking "my character is flashy and daring, he'll do 'a'". 4e does still have options other than powers (bull rush etc) and as someone has stated page 42 of the DMG is basically your "allow the player to try whatever they want and here are some guidelines for determining DC and damage".
In 4e Powers are just another set of options, you still have skills, you still have feats, you still have abilities, you still have gear and magic items - all the stuff PF has. What I admit can perhaps happen is players get so used to using powers that they may forget that they have loads of other options available to them - but that doesn't mean those options aren't there and that they cannot roleplay.
I am a fan of all games to play, each for a different reason, but the main thing is I just like to RP.
Now to run a game I have preferences that I will not bring up in this thread.
Welcome to the OP though. Glad you found our corner of the world.
Triga, welcome to Pf and the Paizo boards. Have fun!