Pathfinder 1E Finally Looked at the Pathfinder Rules...

[Mark Chance]

Those comments really kill the possibility of Pathfinder for me... Casters ruled in earlier editions (once you got up a few levels before that they sucked)... 4e is the first edition where martial types are awesome.

Ah, but those comments aren't accurate. Likewise, it isn't true that 4E is the first edition that has martial-type awesomeness.

 

[BryonD]

Ah, but those comments aren't accurate. Likewise, it isn't true that 4E is the first edition that has martial-type awesomeness.

Very much agreed.
If it played that way for someone, then so be it. But to proclaim these statements as inherent to the system is deeply flawed. shrug

 

[Garthanos]

Ah, but those comments aren't accurate.

Need more info please, I believe they needed serious gimping at high levels in AD&D and all rumors confirm it got worse in 3e (I have read the Wheel of Time Game but not played 3.e), further overshadowing anyone not tossing spells.

I would really like to hear how Pathfinder gimped mu's....

 

[Voadam]

In the end do I prefer either system? I really don't know at this point. I guess I'm asking that people who have played both systems give their input, long as it's constructive criticism. I don't want this to be a flame war by any means, so please don't take my interest in hearing both sides and make it into a horrible argument.

Thanks for all the input in advance!

I've played both. Pathfinder turns cleric turning into a possible heal but does not at base change the 3e need for magical healing while 4e gives everybody healing surges and has a martial core in combat healing class.

Both pathfinder and 4e consolidate the skill lists, 4e goes farther. PF allows fine tuning down to the skill point and allows cross-class competency fairly easily while 4e is less fiddly while providing an advancement in everything according to level and being over all more limited to class skill lists with a little growth possibility through feats. Which one is better for you depends on your taste.

DM prep 4e looks easier to customize and create from scratch but there is a ton of 3e material that 4e does not come close to matching in volume (modules in particular).

Classes, 4e looks more balanced but mechanically homogenous with its at will/encounter/daily paradigm. PF is a little more variable on power but a variety of class mechanics means it can match different mechanical play style preferences more precisely or provide more variety of play experiences.

 

[Mark Chance]

Need more info please, I believe they needed serious gimping at high levels in AD&D and all rumors confirm it got worse in 3e (I have read the Wheel of Time Game but not played 3.e), further overshadowing anyone not tossing spells.

What more info can I give other than a counter-anecdote? I've played D&D since the late 70s. I've very rarely seen that casters consistently overshadow everyone who's not a caster. This is even more true in later editions when the game is run the way the designers intended. I all but guarantee those rumors you've heard stem from games where the DM lets his players get away with the so-called 15-minute adventuring day.

If the DM controls the pacing of the game (IOW, when the party gets to rest and recover resources) rather than letting the casters' players determine pacing, the true balance between the classes becomes much more obvious.

 

[SteveC]

Very much agreed.
If it played that way for someone, then so be it. But to proclaim these statements as inherent to the system is deeply flawed. shrug

I can't agree and stress this comment enough. If you thought 3x was a deeply flawed system, Pathfinder is not going to be the game for you, because it's so similar. Pathfinder in 3X with some minor tweaks kept in print. For many people, that's enough.

If you are looking to stay within the 3X realm and want something different, Fantasycraft or Trailblazer are more what you're looking for. I say that as someone who loves 4E: if I had to play a 3x based OGL game, it would be either of those two systems.

--Steve

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

ITrailblazer introduces several new resource management systems that may be to your liking: action points and the 10-minute rest.

Our goal way to introduce another resource for the PCs to manage that the DM can "tax" (action points) and a rest mechanic that keeps the action moving in order to counter the "15-minute adventuring day".

Hope that helps!

I have taken a look at the section (via the GM Day free preview), and while it does change things I'm just thinking of something still much more different. At some point I might use it to try to build what I'm seeing.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Casters don't dictate the pace of the game. As the DM, I dictate the game's pace.

Have you ever waited for the party to decide to teleport somewhere or walk? If so, you will see the casters dictating the game pace.

Frankly I fin your statement disingenuous.

 

[Garthanos]

If the DM controls the pacing of the game (IOW, when the party gets to rest and recover resources) rather than letting the casters' players determine pacing, the true balance between the classes becomes much more obvious.

Feh, everybody rest as our biggest overwhelmingly baddest gun is out of ammo was "correct" game strategy, not somebody trying to break the game. The DM can only pull so many rush rushes to try and fight it. In the end it doesnt wash.

 

[Piratecat]

As always, guys, this isn't the place for an edition war. Discuss and consider, don't snipe.