|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2010 5:06 pm
I know this is probably going to start a huge debate, but, well, Pathfinder is practically D&D.
It's supposed to be an offshoot of 3E that fixes some of the broken rules. I think it's a response to 4E. I love it so far (though I've never played 3E and only "played" 1e using 2E monsters (don't ask)), also the basic rules are free. They're at the website. So, if anyone is interested, google Paizo.
I was wondering if anyone else used this system?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 14, 2010 1:14 pm
Our DM recently got the book and he seems to like it a lot. I read it over quickly, and I thought it was pretty similar to 3.5 with some add-ons and adjustments.
Once we're finished our current 4.0 campaign we'll probably be testing out pathfinder. At the very least we want to move away from 3.5 now that we have access to other editions.
[/ranting]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 11:18 am
Cherry_chain Our DM recently got the book and he seems to like it a lot. I read it over quickly, and I thought it was pretty similar to 3.5 with some add-ons and adjustments.
Once we're finished our current 4.0 campaign we'll probably be testing out pathfinder. At the very least we want to move away from 3.5 now that we have access to other editions.
[/ranting] It is supposed to be compatible with 3.5. Actually, Pathfinder is the first edition I've actually used correctly, and only the second system of D&D I've ever tried. It took me a while to even convince the only person I know to have ever played D&D to give me his old rulebooks, and it turns out that two were 1E and the Bestiary was 2E, and I had no clue about it at the time. So, most of the sessions I DMed at that time for my friends were composed of pure roleplaying, goofing off, and trying to make sense of the "rules", but it was fun. What's so bad about 3.5? And how is 4E? Most of my acquaintances who are gamers (my fencing class, actually) are strongly against it. I've browsed through one of the books, and it seems character creation is purely assigning already created ability scores, and choosing a race and class, which doesn't much appeal to me. And I'm not very happy about drow being an optional good player class, though I've let my players have drow characters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:36 pm
I meant to say move away from 4.0E** 3.5 is far superior ^^;
4.0 is uh...well, I enjoyed playing it but it is rather restricting. It's good for power players and people new to the d20 system, but isn't very good for the RP aspect. There's a lot more freedom to it than you've described, but it isn't as open as past editions, which is why it's good for newbies or quick one-shots.
I see no problem with playing a good Drow. I'm currently running a Cleric of Eilistraee and it's very interesting. In certain ways she is a very nice person (and extremely laid back >.>) but in other ways her Drow Heritage shows.
[/ranting]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 4:05 pm
As an avid 3.5 player I must say that if you come upon a 4.0 book it should be promptly dipped in oil, and then set on fire...
Na, I'm actually in a 4.0 campaign right now. But I will say that I find it hugely annoying. I'm only really in it because I enjoy the company of the other players. As was stated above it is very restricting. And it is like this because it is focused on combat. To make an analogy, its like table top World of Warcraft. All of the spells and abilities are well balanced and designed for combat. But they often make no sense out of combat because of this. For example...
My cleric has an ability that can buff people with DR5, which is pretty freaking awesome, and it says it can be sustained through a minor action. Meaning from a role play perspective, as long as the character puts SOME effort in to concentrating on maintaining the spells effect, it will persist, which is double awesome right? Yet the second combat ends it mysteriously MUST end... and the spell can only be used once a day... So you can only use it in one fight. So if I'm walking around a dangerous goblin infested dungeon, is it not reasonable to say that the cleric would maintain that spells effect continuously? We are in danger! I will maintain this protective buff over my party!
"NOPE!!! NOT ALLOWED!" says 4E. "The fight is over! So is your effect! If you could keep that effect up through the whole dungeon it would be overpowered and the spell would be broken!" *shakes head*
It is entirely focused on combat and trying to make it "balanced" at the cost of completely nonsensical BS from the role play perspective. (And if you play WoW, you know thats EXACTLY how WoW is as well...)
Bottom line is this. What kind of player are you? Are you the type who just wants to go from fight to fight and thoroughly enjoys the mechanics of combat? Or will you have a 4 hour session of nothing but role play sometimes? If you enjoy the role play aspect of D&D, I'd say avoid 4.0 like the plague. If your all about playing a table top combat strategy game, then 4.0 all the way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:29 pm
I have got the sense that Pathfinder is more a (butt-kicking) response to 4E than anything else.
I do appreciate combat, but Pathfinder handles that just fine in my estimation, and since I find roleplaying and storytelling far more important than defeating monsters, I think I'll stick with Pathfinder. It seems from a storytelling perspective, considering the logic characters would use, Pathfinder combat makes more sense (as aforementioned). Most of the games I've played in real life are very relaxed, and sometimes, when we can't bear to leave off playing just to roast our s'mores, we'll just use pure storytelling for sections of the game.
(The reference to s'mores comes from the tradition me and one of my only gamer friends have of playing D&D while camping.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 7:34 am
I organized a camp once and brought my books and dice. It was fun, and was the birth of our current campaign and characters XP Although the original ended really badly (our fighter ditched us and our Paladin decided to go all Righteous Wrath on a slaver town and got himself killed) our current campaign has been going on for more than half a year and is epic~
You know, D&D is enjoyable because you can bend the rules. We actually get some pretty epic RP sessions into our 4.0 game when our gnome isn't being a complete idiot, and we often bend the rules to make things more awesome.
*had recently just melted a Lich with Healing Word*
We're currently planning for a Pathfinders campaign over the holidays 3nodding
[/ranting]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 11:05 am
I love both camping and D&D, so both of them=awesome. We don't really have an ongoing campaign, just random adventures in the same world (my homebrew one). And on campaign that never gets anywhere because I can never get all the players together in one place.
Unfortunately, I only have two friends who will play Pathfinder with me. And one of them is always doing chores for her parents and so can't come over. And the other isn't very good at D&D. There's a group of gamers at my school, but they seem to be afraid of me because I'm a girl (well, or so it seems). Either they're really dense or they're actually afraid of me, 'cause I've dropped several huge hints that I would like to at least talk about D&D with them. Heck, I even told them how to generate the ability scores, and gave them some information about a prestige class! (ranting)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 25, 2010 1:38 pm
Minandreas As an avid 3.5 player I must say that if you come upon a 4.0 book it should be promptly dipped in oil, and then set on fire... Na, I'm actually in a 4.0 campaign right now. But I will say that I find it hugely annoying. I'm only really in it because I enjoy the company of the other players. As was stated above it is very restricting. And it is like this because it is focused on combat. To make an analogy, its like table top World of Warcraft. All of the spells and abilities are well balanced and designed for combat. But they often make no sense out of combat because of this. For example... My cleric has an ability that can buff people with DR5, which is pretty freaking awesome, and it says it can be sustained through a minor action. Meaning from a role play perspective, as long as the character puts SOME effort in to concentrating on maintaining the spells effect, it will persist, which is double awesome right? Yet the second combat ends it mysteriously MUST end... and the spell can only be used once a day... So you can only use it in one fight. So if I'm walking around a dangerous goblin infested dungeon, is it not reasonable to say that the cleric would maintain that spells effect continuously? We are in danger! I will maintain this protective buff over my party! "NOPE!!! NOT ALLOWED!" says 4E. "The fight is over! So is your effect! If you could keep that effect up through the whole dungeon it would be overpowered and the spell would be broken!" *shakes head* It is entirely focused on combat and trying to make it "balanced" at the cost of completely nonsensical BS from the role play perspective. (And if you play WoW, you know thats EXACTLY how WoW is as well...) Bottom line is this. What kind of player are you? Are you the type who just wants to go from fight to fight and thoroughly enjoys the mechanics of combat? Or will you have a 4 hour session of nothing but role play sometimes? If you enjoy the role play aspect of D&D, I'd say avoid 4.0 like the plague. If your all about playing a table top combat strategy game, then 4.0 all the way. 3.5 character: I'm a first level paladin with a greatsword that kills goblins! 4.0 character: I'm a second level paladin with mithral full plate, magic items, and can kill full grown red dragons! WTF?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 25, 2010 2:37 pm
Minandreas As an avid 3.5 player I must say that if you come upon a 4.0 book it should be promptly dipped in oil, and then set on fire... Na, I'm actually in a 4.0 campaign right now. But I will say that I find it hugely annoying. I'm only really in it because I enjoy the company of the other players. As was stated above it is very restricting. And it is like this because it is focused on combat. To make an analogy, its like table top World of Warcraft. All of the spells and abilities are well balanced and designed for combat. But they often make no sense out of combat because of this. For example... My cleric has an ability that can buff people with DR5, which is pretty freaking awesome, and it says it can be sustained through a minor action. Meaning from a role play perspective, as long as the character puts SOME effort in to concentrating on maintaining the spells effect, it will persist, which is double awesome right? Yet the second combat ends it mysteriously MUST end... and the spell can only be used once a day... So you can only use it in one fight. So if I'm walking around a dangerous goblin infested dungeon, is it not reasonable to say that the cleric would maintain that spells effect continuously? We are in danger! I will maintain this protective buff over my party! "NOPE!!! NOT ALLOWED!" says 4E. "The fight is over! So is your effect! If you could keep that effect up through the whole dungeon it would be overpowered and the spell would be broken!" *shakes head* It is entirely focused on combat and trying to make it "balanced" at the cost of completely nonsensical BS from the role play perspective. (And if you play WoW, you know thats EXACTLY how WoW is as well...) Bottom line is this. What kind of player are you? Are you the type who just wants to go from fight to fight and thoroughly enjoys the mechanics of combat? Or will you have a 4 hour session of nothing but role play sometimes? If you enjoy the role play aspect of D&D, I'd say avoid 4.0 like the plague. If your all about playing a table top combat strategy game, then 4.0 all the way. 4.0 is probably DnD's answer to WoW style playing. WoW was made to focus on combat balance, whereas DnD was more focused on RP. you lose the younger crowd to WoW cause its easier and young kids like beating stuff up and DnD needs to find away to attract those younger players. hence 4.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:05 pm
I would've been playing DnD since I first heard about it, if that was possible for me. And I heard about AD&D, not 4E. Then, I'm not exactly typical of my peer group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:23 pm
othgan243 Minandreas As an avid 3.5 player I must say that if you come upon a 4.0 book it should be promptly dipped in oil, and then set on fire... Na, I'm actually in a 4.0 campaign right now. But I will say that I find it hugely annoying. I'm only really in it because I enjoy the company of the other players. As was stated above it is very restricting. And it is like this because it is focused on combat. To make an analogy, its like table top World of Warcraft. All of the spells and abilities are well balanced and designed for combat. But they often make no sense out of combat because of this. For example... My cleric has an ability that can buff people with DR5, which is pretty freaking awesome, and it says it can be sustained through a minor action. Meaning from a role play perspective, as long as the character puts SOME effort in to concentrating on maintaining the spells effect, it will persist, which is double awesome right? Yet the second combat ends it mysteriously MUST end... and the spell can only be used once a day... So you can only use it in one fight. So if I'm walking around a dangerous goblin infested dungeon, is it not reasonable to say that the cleric would maintain that spells effect continuously? We are in danger! I will maintain this protective buff over my party! "NOPE!!! NOT ALLOWED!" says 4E. "The fight is over! So is your effect! If you could keep that effect up through the whole dungeon it would be overpowered and the spell would be broken!" *shakes head* It is entirely focused on combat and trying to make it "balanced" at the cost of completely nonsensical BS from the role play perspective. (And if you play WoW, you know thats EXACTLY how WoW is as well...) Bottom line is this. What kind of player are you? Are you the type who just wants to go from fight to fight and thoroughly enjoys the mechanics of combat? Or will you have a 4 hour session of nothing but role play sometimes? If you enjoy the role play aspect of D&D, I'd say avoid 4.0 like the plague. If your all about playing a table top combat strategy game, then 4.0 all the way. 4.0 is probably DnD's answer to WoW style playing. WoW was made to focus on combat balance, whereas DnD was more focused on RP. you lose the younger crowd to WoW cause its easier and young kids like beating stuff up and DnD needs to find away to attract those younger players. hence 4.0 Little kids don't realize that DnD isn't about just killing stuff. It's about the actual role playing that you do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 11:35 am
zackwyld234 othgan243 Minandreas As an avid 3.5 player I must say that if you come upon a 4.0 book it should be promptly dipped in oil, and then set on fire... Na, I'm actually in a 4.0 campaign right now. But I will say that I find it hugely annoying. I'm only really in it because I enjoy the company of the other players. As was stated above it is very restricting. And it is like this because it is focused on combat. To make an analogy, its like table top World of Warcraft. All of the spells and abilities are well balanced and designed for combat. But they often make no sense out of combat because of this. For example... My cleric has an ability that can buff people with DR5, which is pretty freaking awesome, and it says it can be sustained through a minor action. Meaning from a role play perspective, as long as the character puts SOME effort in to concentrating on maintaining the spells effect, it will persist, which is double awesome right? Yet the second combat ends it mysteriously MUST end... and the spell can only be used once a day... So you can only use it in one fight. So if I'm walking around a dangerous goblin infested dungeon, is it not reasonable to say that the cleric would maintain that spells effect continuously? We are in danger! I will maintain this protective buff over my party! "NOPE!!! NOT ALLOWED!" says 4E. "The fight is over! So is your effect! If you could keep that effect up through the whole dungeon it would be overpowered and the spell would be broken!" *shakes head* It is entirely focused on combat and trying to make it "balanced" at the cost of completely nonsensical BS from the role play perspective. (And if you play WoW, you know thats EXACTLY how WoW is as well...) Bottom line is this. What kind of player are you? Are you the type who just wants to go from fight to fight and thoroughly enjoys the mechanics of combat? Or will you have a 4 hour session of nothing but role play sometimes? If you enjoy the role play aspect of D&D, I'd say avoid 4.0 like the plague. If your all about playing a table top combat strategy game, then 4.0 all the way. 4.0 is probably DnD's answer to WoW style playing. WoW was made to focus on combat balance, whereas DnD was more focused on RP. you lose the younger crowd to WoW cause its easier and young kids like beating stuff up and DnD needs to find away to attract those younger players. hence 4.0 Little kids don't realize that DnD isn't about just killing stuff. It's about the actual role playing that you do. Its not just little kids though. i'm gonna be a senior in high school when summer ends and the only way i could play DnD is over the internet like the Pathfinder game thats being set up here. everyone these days just wants to fight and kill the last boss for all the glory. they don't care about how they got there or why they have to kill him/her. its all about the loot at the end. i've never been able to play DnD before because of this, and i want to join in Pathfinder so i can play. just got to figure out how to fill in the Character sheet first. confused
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 12:05 pm
othgan243 zackwyld234 othgan243 Minandreas As an avid 3.5 player I must say that if you come upon a 4.0 book it should be promptly dipped in oil, and then set on fire... Na, I'm actually in a 4.0 campaign right now. But I will say that I find it hugely annoying. I'm only really in it because I enjoy the company of the other players. As was stated above it is very restricting. And it is like this because it is focused on combat. To make an analogy, its like table top World of Warcraft. All of the spells and abilities are well balanced and designed for combat. But they often make no sense out of combat because of this. For example... My cleric has an ability that can buff people with DR5, which is pretty freaking awesome, and it says it can be sustained through a minor action. Meaning from a role play perspective, as long as the character puts SOME effort in to concentrating on maintaining the spells effect, it will persist, which is double awesome right? Yet the second combat ends it mysteriously MUST end... and the spell can only be used once a day... So you can only use it in one fight. So if I'm walking around a dangerous goblin infested dungeon, is it not reasonable to say that the cleric would maintain that spells effect continuously? We are in danger! I will maintain this protective buff over my party! "NOPE!!! NOT ALLOWED!" says 4E. "The fight is over! So is your effect! If you could keep that effect up through the whole dungeon it would be overpowered and the spell would be broken!" *shakes head* It is entirely focused on combat and trying to make it "balanced" at the cost of completely nonsensical BS from the role play perspective. (And if you play WoW, you know thats EXACTLY how WoW is as well...) Bottom line is this. What kind of player are you? Are you the type who just wants to go from fight to fight and thoroughly enjoys the mechanics of combat? Or will you have a 4 hour session of nothing but role play sometimes? If you enjoy the role play aspect of D&D, I'd say avoid 4.0 like the plague. If your all about playing a table top combat strategy game, then 4.0 all the way. 4.0 is probably DnD's answer to WoW style playing. WoW was made to focus on combat balance, whereas DnD was more focused on RP. you lose the younger crowd to WoW cause its easier and young kids like beating stuff up and DnD needs to find away to attract those younger players. hence 4.0 Little kids don't realize that DnD isn't about just killing stuff. It's about the actual role playing that you do. Its not just little kids though. i'm gonna be a senior in high school when summer ends and the only way i could play DnD is over the internet like the Pathfinder game thats being set up here. everyone these days just wants to fight and kill the last boss for all the glory. they don't care about how they got there or why they have to kill him/her. its all about the loot at the end. i've never been able to play DnD before because of this, and i want to join in Pathfinder so i can play. just got to figure out how to fill in the Character sheet first. confused There's a link on the game thread that should take you to a rules site. On the left hand side, near the top, there should be something about "getting started". Also, at the paizo site, there're messageboards where you can join other Pathfinder games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hane no Kori Vice Captain
|
Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2010 6:05 am
Hey, how is that announcement I sent working out? Are you getting a decent amount of players? If you still need more I can send out another one saying how many you need and when you're going to stop taking people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
