Pathfinder 1E Excited About Pathfinder

[pawsplay]

Orginally, I was a little skeptical of Pathfinder. Then once it came out, I was pleased. I feel like it really built on the foundations of 3.5. I wasn't expecting to, but I've actually got to the point now where I'm excited about it. I want to see stuff in action. I want to create new scenarios. I want to see character development. I want to write.

In many ways, the Pathfinder book takes the game back to its uncluttered core. I like having options, but obviously not everything in the 3e line was great. I feel like I could play core only with PF and have plenty to keep me busy for a long time.

 

[Aus_Snow]

*Still* haven't got my copy. . . But I like what I do know of it, and am looking forward to playing some D&D with it.

As for GMing, apart from M&M 2e, I'm undecided when it comes to what to run. Pathfinder is certainly a contender, however.

 

[Erekose]

*Still* haven't got my copy. . . But I like what I do know of it, and am looking forward to playing some D&D with it.

I feel your pain

I still haven't received my copy from Amazon UK and I pre-ordered it in December!

Sigh . . . as you say, at least people who have received their copies are saying good things about it!

 

[Elbeghast]

In many ways, the Pathfinder book takes the game back to its uncluttered core.

I agree. It sort of put third edition's evolution into perspective by restating the basics. I found myself looking at my 3.0, 3.5 and various OGL/d20 sourcebooks with renewed interest and a clean mind, like one would come back to a study after opening the windows and letting in some fresh air.

 

[pawsplay]

I really like the hands-off approach they took. For instance, most people, I think, really liked the sorcerer bloodline feats in 3.5, and so they were adapted to Pathfinder. But if you didn't like them? Then you can stick with the Arcane bloodline and they aren't foisted onto you.

 

[Elbeghast]

I really like the hands-off approach they took. For instance, most people, I think, really liked the sorcerer bloodline feats in 3.5, and so they were adapted to Pathfinder. But if you didn't like them? Then you can stick with the Arcane bloodline and they aren't foisted onto you.

True. I hadn't considered it that way.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

I agree. It sort of put third edition's evolution into perspective by restating the basics. I found myself looking at my 3.0, 3.5 and various OGL/d20 sourcebooks with renewed interest and a clean mind, like one would come back to a study after opening the windows and letting in some fresh air.

I completely agree with this. I'm starting Crypt of the Everflame with my group this Friday and there is a definite uncluttering and breath of fresh air in returning to a core ruleset. While I think the Advanced Players Guide will be excellent, I'm glad timing-wise that we're going to have a year to discover the core again.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[uffinf]

I'm the same, I've been a big fan of Pathfinder since the first adventure path but didn't really have plans to try and get my group to swich from 3.5 to PFRPG till reading thru the entire rule book, now my only question is how best to pitch changing systems.

 

[joela]

I agree. It sort of put third edition's evolution into perspective by restating the basics. I found myself looking at my 3.0, 3.5 and various OGL/d20 sourcebooks with renewed interest and a clean mind, like one would come back to a study after opening the windows and letting in some fresh air.

+1. The 3.x rules, ultimately, is an excellent system with many good offshoots (e.g., D&D, True20, etc.)

 

[Drkfathr1]

Yes, I actually felt a great deal of relief by realizing I was going to go with Pathfinder.

Now I don't have to retcon or re-imagine my homebrew world. I don't have to re-work rules, concepts, or house rule large chunks of the game to fit the settings I'm familiar with.

It's like a great weight has been lifted.

It's very nice to be excited by D&D again, and not be filled with angst and frustration.