Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fireinthedust" data-source="post: 4799424" data-attributes="member: 51930">James Jacobs:   Thanks!  I remember at GenCon Indy 05, I ran into acouple WOTC artists, and one of them said pay was by the picture, so that makes sense.      I totally understand where you're coming from with enjoying 3.x/pf, so I'm just glad you lot are out there.  Admittedly, I enjoy 4e (I've said as much) but for the grownup group I DM for Pathfinder really hits the tone and setting-style I enjoy.  Tis loverly ground fer plunderin', sez oy!On the other hand, I just played a game with my Neice.  Her first game.  She was playing Candyland, so I said "who would you be in Candyland?"   Her response:  "Um, I like Gumdrops, so I'll be... Gumdrop Gracie!"   Her mum and I get visual migrainse from sugar, she likes fuzzy peaches, so she was "Fuzzy Aurora", whose quest was to find the fabled "Vegetables" (pronounced to rhyme with Fuggedables, like mobsters saying "forget about it").  They defeated Lord Licorice by throwing chocolate-colored nuts at him and his Gobble-ins, and save Princess Frostine and Lolly.  My neice was surprised when I told her she'd just effectively played her first RPG.  She can't wait til next time, when they go exploring "Fairytale Land", next door to Candyland.So we RP'd a game with her and her mum not 10 minutes ago.  Instead of dice (none handy) we used the Candyland cards, with a range of six, high being a hit (green, orange, blue).         I bring this up because it was the setting that really caught her imagination.  Among others (some 4e) Pathfinder is really catching mine.      For me and my adult group, I love DMing a darker setting with lots of ambiguity and complexity, which Pathfinder can provide (though I assimilate it into what I've already done as a setting).  I could do the same thing one night, with Candyland cards even, and my group could have a good time.  4e I enjoy, 3e I enjoy, and I'm looking forward to reading 3.pf anyway.  But I (personally, and it's a preference, and the reason I posted this thread) find 4e is easier on me to run a complete game, numbers-wise.     Before anyone jumps on my head, consider that I broke down RPGs to a kid who's 8, smart but still younger than the expected 11+ age range for Piaget's Formal-Operational stage (involving abstract reasoning skills and rationalizing said concepts), which just happens to be the suggested age for D&D of, I think, any edition (it was in 2e, when I started).  Really, there are two major elements that any group enjoys (I think): 1) the setting to draw them in,  and 2) doing something, or accomplishing something, with a risk factor in it.   2 needs 1 to allow 2 to mean anything.       DMs like me also enjoy production value and quick-fix aides to running a game smoothly, but that's beside the point.  Whatever I run, I need to be into it, or at least have enough that I can convince my players to jump into it.I could do that breakdown for kids with 3e, or 3.pf (I'm that good <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cool:" title="Cool    :cool:"  data-smilie="6"data-shortname=":cool:" />), I guess.  I use 4e for many reasons, just like I'm moving towards a simple-system kid game for my neice and co, one of which is I don't have to think about numbers.   Also 4e has a character and monster generator in DDI, a great cheat.But, as I've said, Pathfinder has the instant-draw factor.  It's the setting I would want to be in, in a lot of ways, and it's incredibly rich.</blockquote>

Verification