wayne62682
First Post
For over a year now I've been playing 4e and loving it. I recently looked at a Pathfinder book at my local bookstore, and wow it seems like they fixed most of the issues with 3.5, not to mention the beautiful artwork and detail that Paizo puts into it, not to mention the fact that I absolutely loved their Adventure Paths.
My one problem with 4e is that it puts too much emphasis on your role, and less on your concept; in fact, the game basically punishes you if you choose to play what you want and not what the group needs. This alone makes me want to revisit 3.x via Pathfinder, since I would much rather be able to tell my players the theme of the campaign, and let them make whatever their heart desires that fits the theme, than have at least one person who ends up having to play a certain character class because otherwise the group will be without a tank/aoe/buffer/dps.
The issue is that my group, except for my current DM (who I've mentioned previously in other threads) are all entirely new to D&D and all they know is 4e. They have a hard enough time remembering what their attack and damage is with certain powers; they barely do any roleplaying or character development (although to be fair I blame the DM because he's just running published adventures without even making an attempt to tie them together into a story). I'm sorely tempted to suggest at our next game that we give Pathfinder a shot, instead of the 4e Eberron game I'm supposed to be running. After all 3.5 wasn't that much more complex than 4e was in most regards.
Has anyone done this and convinced a group that only has played 4e to try something new? Given the group dynamics (newbies, have trouble with 4e, very casual gamers who don't really care about RPing) would I be wasting my time?
My one problem with 4e is that it puts too much emphasis on your role, and less on your concept; in fact, the game basically punishes you if you choose to play what you want and not what the group needs. This alone makes me want to revisit 3.x via Pathfinder, since I would much rather be able to tell my players the theme of the campaign, and let them make whatever their heart desires that fits the theme, than have at least one person who ends up having to play a certain character class because otherwise the group will be without a tank/aoe/buffer/dps.
The issue is that my group, except for my current DM (who I've mentioned previously in other threads) are all entirely new to D&D and all they know is 4e. They have a hard enough time remembering what their attack and damage is with certain powers; they barely do any roleplaying or character development (although to be fair I blame the DM because he's just running published adventures without even making an attempt to tie them together into a story). I'm sorely tempted to suggest at our next game that we give Pathfinder a shot, instead of the 4e Eberron game I'm supposed to be running. After all 3.5 wasn't that much more complex than 4e was in most regards.
Has anyone done this and convinced a group that only has played 4e to try something new? Given the group dynamics (newbies, have trouble with 4e, very casual gamers who don't really care about RPing) would I be wasting my time?