Pathfinder 1E Am I ready for Pathfinder, and if not, when?

[Psyga315]

Last month, I've gotten into and played quite a bit of 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons, with some touchings of 3.5. I remember a vlog saying where to start in Dungeons and Dragons and mentioned Pathfinder being more advanced, and several videos pointing out how it's the successor to 3.5, or at least feels like 3.5. During a visit at a book store, I noticed a starting kit for Pathfinder, much like how there is a starter kit for Dungeons and Dragons. It actually made me wonder if I should buy it.

Though, I'm not sure if I'm "ready" for Pathfinder, or if I would want to switch over (though I'm aware that it's possible to play both Pathfinder and 4th without switching), so I'm gonna ask here and see what you guys think. Do you think I'm ready to get myself Pathfinder, or should I stick to 4th Edition for a while until I get the hang of playing tabletop RPGs (I'm mostly a beginner, or I'd like to think of myself as that)?

 

[gamerprinter]

The Beginner Box is a great starter package for Pathfinder and is in fact a 'starter' product, unlike 4e's Essentials starter product which was not really a starter at all (more an extension to the game, not a simplified version). The Beginner Box precludes certain aspects of PF, such as Combat Maneuvers in order to simplify the game. There are limited available feats, spells, and monsters, but enough to get a starting adventure with included module, map and monster/PC pawns. I bought this for my nephews. Ideally it's a product for someone who has never played a tabletop RPG before.

Since you are experienced playing D&D of previous editions, IMO, you needn't start with the Beginner Box, I'd suggest picking up the Pathfinder Core rule book and start from there. I'd also strongly suggest picking up the Advanced Player Guide right away as well, as this is the product where PF stands more on it's own than being a backwards compatable product - class archetypes are something you want to play with at the start, and that first shows up in the APG.

 

[Cherno]

I don't now anything about Pathfinder, but from what I've heard the PF Introductory box is rather excellent, though that might not say much since the D&D 4E Essentials Red Box has been released.

 

[S'mon]

I'm sure you could handle regular Pathfinder OK; it's just like 3e with a few added bells and whistles that add extra options, like Clerics using positive energy to heal people, or wizards who can cast a half dozen magic missiles at 1st level.

I do recommend the Pathfinder Beginner Box though, it's absolutely brilliant, covers 5 levels, and the presentation is far far slicker than the 2009 Pathfinder Core Rulebook. It also plays about twice as fast, and most of the components are useable in the full game.

 

[S'mon]

Do you think I'm ready to get myself Pathfinder, or should I stick to 4th Edition for a while until I get the hang of playing tabletop RPGs (I'm mostly a beginner, or I'd like to think of myself as that)?

Personally I use Pathfinder and 4e D&D for different sorts of game experience. You can play and enjoy both.

 

[Psyga315]

Since you are experienced playing D&D of previous editions, IMO, you needn't start with the Beginner Box, I'd suggest picking up the Pathfinder Core rule book and start from there. I'd also strongly suggest picking up the Advanced Player Guide right away as well, as this is the product where PF stands more on it's own than being a backwards compatable product - class archetypes are something you want to play with at the start, and that first shows up in the APG.

I'm more (in terms of leaps and bounds) familiar to 4th than I am with 3.5, if that's to suggest anything.

I don't now anything about Pathfinder, but from what I've heard the PF Introductory box is rather excellent, though that might not say much since the D&D 4E Essentials Red Box has been released.

I bought the Red Box (and even played a bit of the adventure it had set up), and thought it was great, so I assume that the starter set is of the same or better quality.

 

[TerraDave]

If you like 4E, you might want to just stay with it. As you play at higher levels and add in options, it can be "advanced" enough.

 

[Ahnehnois]

There's nothing in PF you can't handle. The rules are available online for free. I'd suggest perusing them, trying the rules out on a small scale, and then deciding whether you want to actually buy the game.

 

[MatthewJHanson]

I don't think that it's the sort of thing that you need to be "ready" for. There are many people who play Pathfinder as a first game. Nor do I think that you should change over just because Pathfinder is more "advanced." (I might say that complex is a better description than advanced.)

It's more a matter of style in my opinion. Both games have some strengths and some weaknesses. The question you should really be asking yourself is if Pathfinder fits your style of play. Of course it's had to know what style of play you really like until you've tried a few.

So I guess my advice would be, try a little Pathfinder. See if you like it more or less than 4e, the go with whichever you prefer.

 

[Psyga315]

If you like 4E, you might want to just stay with it. As you play at higher levels and add in options, it can be "advanced" enough.

Hm... That might be interesting to do, though I may need to find some good options/house rules.

There's nothing in PF you can't handle. The rules are available online for free. I'd suggest perusing them, trying the rules out on a small scale, and then deciding whether you want to actually buy the game.

O_O Holy... Y'know what? I'm probably gonna go and do that as soon as I'm done with some of my RPing projects.

I don't think that it's the sort of thing that you need to be "ready" for. There are many people who play Pathfinder as a first game. Nor do I think that you should change over just because Pathfinder is more "advanced." (I might say that complex is a better description than advanced.)

It's more a matter of style in my opinion. Both games have some strengths and some weaknesses. The question you should really be asking yourself is if Pathfinder fits your style of play. Of course it's had to know what style of play you really like until you've tried a few.

So I guess my advice would be, try a little Pathfinder. See if you like it more or less than 4e, the go with whichever you prefer.

Well, my style of play, as far as I know, is (according to the DM's Guide) Actor/Storyteller or (going by GNS Theory) Narrativist, but yeah, going with the above advice of trying out some Pathfinder after I'm done with my projects.