Pathfinder 1E I'd like to change some of the rule set. Need advice.

[Joe Sumfin]

I've been playing with power player min-max'ers and I'll be honest I'm not that kind of player. It semi ruins my game and meh. So I've read about Dungeon World being an interesting system and I checked it out and I'm wondering how I might be able to apply that die system to a pathfinder game.

I'm picturing that the player can roll 2d10 and 1 is crit miss, 2-5 is fail with consequence, 6-9 is a success and 10 is epic win. Now there are some situations where a player shouldn't be able to hit something(say like a demi-god) so in situations there'd be call for a difficulty rating so they can't just kill everything.

In doing this I am thinking I'm getting rid of the AC system and kind of defeating the power players just abusing AC and their to-hit bonus' which is what I want. BUT this also means that battles would be completely random and just because of rolls the players could potentially never hit anything and I can't just hand them a win.

They would keep their pathfinder character sheets and use their skill points to roll acrobatics and such. I'm thinking no roll on diplomacy because honestly thats a horrible skill to just roll it out. They RP diplomacy and if its good RP they don't have to roll, if its not good they can roll and a high roll might tip the scale.

Now this is where it gets tricky... They could keep their spell list and feats and can use those in battle but then its just "I shoot him twice." Which to me honestly gets boring because its just a dice game then. Theres no.. action.. if you follow me? I want combat to be more interesting then just "I shoot a bow" I swing a sword" "Do I hit?" dmg amount. I guess I want to to RP with the world and flip a table, do a leg sweep, kick some dirt, use a frying pan.

Maybe they can use their feat as a once per combat thing?

Other thing I'm wondering about is the damage system. Dungeon World uses an across the board system. Long sword is d8, short sword/bow is a d6, etc. I'm wondering if I should just use that system and adjust everyones HP or just keep the Pathfinder system and not need to?

Looking for any advice.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

It might just be easier to play Dungeon World to scratch that itch and play Pathfinder to do its thing. A hybrid is doable, but you are basically writing your own game to make it work.

Which is cool... I would love to see what you come up with.

 

[Kinak]

I agree that you're way off the rails. What you're talking about isn't recognizably Pathfinder or Dungeon World.

Which, obviously, is totally fine. There are lots of great games out there that aren't Pathfinder or Dungeon World.

But, before you move down that path with an existing group, make sure they are actually interested in playing a totally different game. Otherwise it'll just start a huge fight.

Do they even want the same thing as you? It very easily might be you and your group just aren't a good fit. Plenty of groups play Pathfinder without min-maxing and plenty have exciting combats.

Social stuff aside, it's hard to design a good game off a list of grievances. Get some distance, focus on what you want rather than what you don't want, and build a game to reward that.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[GMMichael]

I've been playing with power player min-max'ers and I'll be honest I'm not that kind of player. It semi ruins my game and meh. . .
In doing this I am thinking I'm getting rid of the AC system and kind of defeating the power players just abusing AC and their to-hit bonus' which is what I want.

They could keep their spell list and feats and can use those in battle but then its just "I shoot him twice." Which to me honestly gets boring because its just a dice game then. Theres no.. action.. if you follow me? I want combat to be more interesting then just "I shoot a bow" I swing a sword" "Do I hit?" dmg amount.

Plusfinder is a power-player game (hence the nickname). It comes with the territory. If you want to "abuse" your PCs...something needs to change. However, if you radically change your game without permission, you'll lose players.

With that said, Dungeon World might be a good game for you. Merging it with Pathfinder could be a headache, fair warning.

Since you're looking for more than "I shoot him twice" and here's my damage, you might try adding some incentives to your game. And you know how to motivate Plusfinder players: with pluses. Try this handy table...

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 500"] [TR] [TD]Player effort
[/TD] [TD]Reward
[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Adds an adjective to "I attack"
[/TD] [TD]+1
[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Uses an attack/defense description
[/TD] [TD]+2
[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]Character does something dramatic
[/TD] [TD]Take 10 in battle
[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]
These rewards are inclusive. So your dream RP effort could get a player an auto 13 on his roll. (Is that enough?)

 

[Joe Sumfin]

I don't have a group I'm DM'ing yet and I wouldn't just drop this on them. This thing would be a work in progress, which is why I came here looking for anything you all might find might come up at some point.

We would all agree to the rules before I would even want to DM thing thing. The thing with me is that its not that I don't like the pathfinder system but I find its so number crunchy. Yes, STR checks make sense and it all makes sense but honestly I'm just looking for ways to speed up the process and keep the rolls to a minimum but still have it fair.

I would want the players to interact with the world and think out of the pathfinder box of "I have these feats and thats all I'm going to use." To me and from what I've seen from some of the players is each round kind of becomes the same. I want to try to figure out how to avoid that.

As for going strictly Dungeon World, I do like their system but I don't know their ruleset 100% but I don't think I like the ... reactional stuff. Like "In this situation, this has to happen or has a reaction." I forget what they call it but its like the players only have a set of options they can use during situations.

I guess what got me to even thinking down this road is that I'm new to the D&D/Etc scene and I've never played old school 1e/etc before. But I pictured D&D more as a DM explaining the scene, what you've walked into and you just saying what you want to do, look at/etc. More RP heavy, and yes some of my group isn't RP heavy but I wouldn't drowned them in RP but the world needs flavor besides combat.

What got me to thinking about this is a little booklet I found on the net called the Quick Primer for Old School Gaming. http://entertainment.lilithezine.com/Quick-Primer-for-Old-School-Gaming.html

Quote from the book(which is at the link)
[h=3]First Zen Moment: Rulings, not Rules[/h]Most of the time in old-style gaming, you don’t use a rule; you make a ruling. It’s easy to understand that sentence, but it takes a flash of insight to really “get it.” The players can describe any action, without needing to look at a character sheet to see if they “can” do it. The referee, in turn, uses common sense to decide what happens or rolls a die if he thinks there’s some random element involved, and then the game moves on. This is why characters have so few numbers on the character sheet, and why they have so few specified abilities. Many of the things that are “die roll” challenges in modern gaming (disarming a trap, for example) are handled by observation, thinking, and experimentation in old-style games. Getting through obstacles is more “hands-on” than you’re probably used to. Rules are a resource for the referee, not for the players. Players use observation and description as their tools and resources: rules are for the referee only.

My thought would be that all players read that booklet and more or less to agree to give their advice a try.