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

[Obryn]

I'll just try and make this short & sweet, because I don't want to read the whole damn thread at this point.

Play a lot of games. Switch between them, and enjoy them for what they do well. There's no need to just pick one, and in fact, I think you cheat yourself if you do.

-O

 

[SpydersWebbing]

That is a good point, and of course I do that anyway. After the current 4th game I'm in I'll probably start in a Shadowrun. But I was more asking what the difference between Pathfinder and 4th were in terms of stories, because the two really do feel as different as they can be, I'm just not sure how. This is more for informational purposes as opposed to seeing which side is better.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

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.

That is a major part of what being a GM/DM is all about - regardless of edition or even game. Making sure that if the PCs dawdle along, adventuring for 15 minutes a day then the bad guys will put in a full days hard work being evil - doing things while the PCs nap. Even more annoying for the PCs is to find out that they aren't the only good guys, and someone else beat them to the punch, and are being lauded as heroes.

Hit 'em while they are napping. Hit 'em on the way back to town. Let 'em know that sometimes the best option is to press on, and that evil doesn't just sit in the dungeons, waiting for PCs to show up, kill them, and take their stuff.

The Auld Grump, tempted to start reciting Rudyard Kipling's If.

 

[AllisterH]

Coldwyn is correct.

It really, REALY depends on what class you are talking about.

There is a mistaken belief that most of the splat book options were more powerful than the core stuff but even to the very end of the 3.5 lifespan, the only non core classes that were grouped or tiered with the core wizard, druid and cleric was the archivist and the artificer. Similarly, Natural spell is still the best feat in the game.

While people always focus on classes like from the Bo9S and the archivist, the vast majority of the options were closer to things like the scout and the warmage. You can see what they are analogues to, but generally speaking, less powerful than their core counterparts.

 

[darjr]

My kid and I love 4e.

His Moldvay redbox is 3.5. He took one look at Pathfinder and loved it. For me? Nuff said.

 

[Stormonu]

I've gotten the PF books, but I can't remember any big issues I had with 3E other than multiclassing/prestige classes annoyed me (not a problem, just annoying). Of course, ever since my BD&D days, I pretty much wrap up my campaign once the game hits levels in the double-digits. I simply don't like high-level play - in any edition.

However, I really did not enjoy my short stints running/playing a 4E game, and I'm not likely to go back to it, though I am keeping my eye open to see how the new Dark Sun turns out.

Currently, I'm running WoD games, but when I go back to D&D, I suspect it will be a 3E/PF mix. Probably heavy on core 3E, with only some PF thrown in, as if it were a splat book like Unearthed Arcana.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

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

You only dictate so far. You don't control the hitpoints of the PCs nor their spell lists directly. You can force people to keep going long past the point where they would have liked to stop with role playing or pure DM fiat, sure.

But if I run another moderately difficult battle when the PCs are out of healing spells, it's likely to end in a TPK. When the pace of the game is dictated such that the PCs are put into a situation where they either continue because the DM is forcing them to knowing that they can't survive another combat or they stop regardless of what the DM wants, you almost always end up with an argument.

And due to the swinginess of 3.5/Pathfinder combat, you can't accurately predict if that EL 12 encounter is going to do no damage to anyone in the group or if it is going to use up half their spells. Or both.

 

[BryonD]

you almost always end up with an argument.

You know, in the group I've played with for the past decade, I can not recall a single argument ever.

And due to the swinginess of 3.5/Pathfinder combat, you can't accurately predict if that EL 12 encounter is going to do no damage to anyone in the group or if it is going to use up half their spells. Or both.

More or less true. But a system in which the outcomes are largely predestined is exactly the opposite of what I find fun.

And the pace remains the pace established by the DM.

 

[avin]

Haven't tried PF yet but, judging by what I've saw, my game of choice would be a mix between PF and 4E.

If Paizo had decided to go one step further fixing some 3.5 stuff I didn't like (and I like 3.5 A LOT), like really simple grapple rules (4E) and push more the spellcasting tone down I'd playing it right now.

Maye 5E is what I'm looking for... so far 2E, 3.5 4E and PF still aren't as good as I need

 

[malkav666]

My group found PF during the beta and have been playing since the official release. Its not perfect as no system is. But it meets our needs, and we enjoy it very much.

As for the spellcasters pacing my games? Never been a problem. The DM has a few really good tools to prevent this:

1. Time sensitive objectives. Sure you can rest but if you take too many days Bowser kills the princess, or the darkness overtakes the town and the adventure fails. Sure you will look great for those encounters you participate in, but you will fail at being a hero.

2. Camping in the wilderness and ruins is dangerous. If your mages go nova and leave nothing held back with the expectation that they can just rest. Sometimes they may be right, but sometimes they are not. Random encounters occur, and sometimes the big encounters occur when the party is camping. The mage with no spells will nto contribute to that fight. the end result is one of two things. The mage will stop going nova, or they will just suck in that fight and everyone else will get a chance to shine. Either is cool with me.

2. This is a vatriant of time sensitive but sometimes the group is trying to catch someone or run from someone, camping all of the time will result in failing at wither objective.

As far as teleporting, I say go for it. Everyone benefits from that, and there is a chance of error. The most important thing to remember though is that time marches on. If your players are taking weeks cutting through the encounters 1 at a time and resting, let the bad guy acomplish some of his goals while he is waiting, repopulate rooms, change seasons.

The casters don't dictate the pace of anything but themselves (and the party if they let the casters do so). The game moves at the pace the DM sets, the casters can ration their spells to meet that pace, or they can suck for some of the encoutners once they are spent, or fail at missions.

But thats just how I do it, YMMV

love,

malkav