Pathfinder 1E Opinions on Pathfinder

[Chrono22]

I'll answer your questions. I just finished Crypt of the Everflame two weeks ago with my group. They enjoyed it and we started up Masks of the Living God. Both are part of a three mod arch written by Jason Bulmahn and are great introductory modules. Paizo's adventures are well written IMO whether they are independent mods or part of the AP stories. I've read through the first two parts of Council of Thieves, but probably won't run them for my group. I want my group to learn the world so running an AP is out since they tend to focus on specific regions. If you want to having everything in a set area then APs are the route to go. Hodge Podge campaigning with different stories then go with the Pathfinder mods or the older Gamemastery ones.

I played in some of the pathfinder society adventures. The first four, actually. I found that the over-reliance on artifact macguffins detracted a bit from the plots, but overall the modules were very good. They engaged the players tactically, they offered unique environment-based challenges and obstacles, and they had good pacing overall.
It looks like Paizo has maintained that recipe, if not improved it.

There are three versions of the Pathfinder SRD available as well as a hyperlinked PDF. There's the one that Paizo has put up as well as the one mentioned here. The third one escapes me right now but if you do some searching on Paizo's boards you'll find it. As for how they compare with the hyperlinked 3.5 SRD I'd say they're about the same if not better depending on your tastes and which one you end up using. Hope that answers your question.

Thanks.

That we are so hard to please that the company with the most experience in the industry can't make a decision without getting poo flung in its direction is not something that flatters us.

Um, calling criticism poo flinging is the height of exaggeration. If WotC and it's over-reactive fanbase can't handle the heat, they should get out of the fire. Being the 500 lb gorilla doesn't make WotC a victim or immune to criticism.

Oh no. WotC had to revise their proposed feature list for DDI. How awful.
...
There seem to be some people within the tabletop roleplaying community who are unable to let the issue go two years later, even though DDI is a truly excellent product package that almost everyone you'll find on here running 4e agrees is well worth the price of admission.

Well, the last part is arguable. I certainly don't think it's worth it. Not when I can compare it to the innumerable 3rd party tools that came with previous editions for free.
You know what people hate more than failure? Dishonesty.
Until WotC balls up and admits they will never release the table top, they are singularly responsible for any flak they get about it. It was marketed as a tool that would revolutionize the way we play- and furthermore would become a central tool to playing 4e. To say they've failed to deliver would be an understatement.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I fail to see how illusions, weather, and invisibility are irrelevant in combat.

No one said they were.

Um, wrong.

The 4e stat block is cutting out everything that won't work in the situation that calls for a stat block 99% of the time- A fight.

That was why I quoted that post, after all. Scribble's claim there is that the 4e dragon only excludes stuff that isn't relevant to combat. Since the 4e dragon excludes illusions, weather, and invisibility, the implication is that those things are not relevant to combat.

They just didn't give the blue dragon any of these things.

If you feel your blue dragon is missing them, just find an ability that matches what you're trying to do, and drop it into the blue dragon's stat block.

I do feel like my blue dragon is missing them, but I feel even more strongly that THE blue dragon is missing them. And has other, more boring abilities instead. I also feel like the 4e blue dragon is missing context and a reason for existing, which is what I argued in the rest of the post.

I'm sure if you read the post again, I am sure you will see that I find the 4e adult blue dragon to be a tremendously boring monster, and that I believe it could have been otherwise, given the source material (Pathfinder's blue dragon is certainly not a boring monster).

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

Ok guys I was in on this too, but can we stop the 4e can or does or does not stuff. This is not a thread about 4e, now if ya say ya don't like pathfinder dragons and what not thats fine, but for many pages now this has been a 4e vs 3.5 vs pathfinder thing and it's getting old.

 

[Mark Chance]

There are three versions of the Pathfinder SRD available as well as a hyperlinked PDF.

There's a hyperlinked PDF? Where, please?

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

The hyperlinked PDF you can buy from Paizo for 9.99 here http://paizo.com/store/downloads/pathfinder/pathfinderRPG/v5748btpy88yj&source=top

The official PRD or pathfinder reference document can here found here Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document

Unoffical but good one can be found here Pathfinder SRD (Pathfinder_OGC)

A 3rd can be found here Pathfinder Reference Document Dot Com

 

[Mark Chance]

The hyperlinked PDF you can buy from Paizo for 9.99 here http://paizo.com/store/downloads/pathfinder/pathfinderRPG/v5748btpy88yj&source=top

The official PRD or pathfinder reference document can here found here Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document

Unoffical but good one can be found here Pathfinder SRD (Pathfinder_OGC)

A 3rd can be found here Pathfinder Reference Document Dot Com

Thanks! I didn't know Paizo was selling a hyperlinked PDF. I guess if I'd bothered to look....

As far as online SRDs go, I prefer d20pfsrd.com. Works better for me.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

Thanks! I didn't know Paizo was selling a hyperlinked PDF. I guess if I'd bothered to look....

As far as online SRDs go, I prefer d20pfsrd.com. Works better for me.

That one is the 2nd srd listed, also you can get a firefox plug in for it. A note on the PDF's when they update or revise the PDF you can download the new version for free. So if they add Errata, like they did for the 2nd printing and will be doing for the 3rd they will update the PDF with that Errata and you can just download the new version. Which is very nice

 

[billd91]

And really, the video game fan community is able to get over its frothing rage within a couple of weeks.

Tell that to the Duke Nukem fans.
Blizzard gets more of a pass because it has a track record of delivering something really good when it delivers and it delivers frequently enough that they don't burn through their stockpile of good will. Now, the DDI stuff may be pretty useful, but before that, WotC's track record of delivering electronic resources was terrible. They had no good will to trade on and deserved the criticism they got for non-delivery.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

I'll get on that right after you reference where in the 3.5 and/or PF canon the "players were told that they were on a level playing field with the DM."

You know what I meant was that players felt this way. The evidence for this was in the myriad threads on the topic throughout 3E's run. The level playing field I'm talking about is the use of the same rules for PCs and non-PCs. AD&D adventures were full of puzzles, challenges and plots that took place "off-camera" that were chalked up to the DM playing by different rules. There were NPC-only classes in Dragon meant to be more powerful by design, but only used by the DM. Some 3E players cried in dissatisfication whenever such an unexplained occurence would happen that could not be covered by the rules. Did every 3E player do this? No. Were the ones who did so justified? Matter of opinion. Were the ones who did so unsatisfied with the experience? Yes.

The transition from player entitlement to having to follow the same rules is a non sequitur.

Again, I'd ask for a specific example where the monsters following the same rules created a player entitlement.

Please don't blame the system for failures you are inserting into it.

You and I are using entitlement to mean different things here. I'm not talking about being entitled to have a certain amount of wealth per level or anything material in-game. I'm talking about the entitlement to shackle the DM to the same rules they were using. AD&D had mysteries beyond the capability of the characters to discover. Options available only to the DM. Many DMs who tried to continue this old school paradigm encountered resistance from dissatisfied players. They held the DM accountable to explain how his pieces accomplished what they did through the rules. I'm not blaming the system for any failures. I don't even consider this an overall failure of the system, only an unsatisfying occurence for DMs who prefer the old paradigm.

Usually, I open the PDF's that I want to use and copy and paste what I need from there into a word document. From there I usually edit things down, then when I'm done I print and I'm done. Needless to say doing it this way usually goes a lot quicker.

This would still take me 15 minutes. You must be more tech savvy. I mean your searching a database of spells for DCs, effects, range, etc. just to use a stock monster. A stock 4E monster is self-contained and usable immediately.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

This would still take me 15 minutes. You must be more tech savvy. I mean your searching a database of spells for DCs, effects, range, etc. just to use a stock monster. A stock 4E monster is self-contained and usable immediately.

Again a bit off topic but pathfinder has the DC's listed in the statblock. But if it takes you 15 minutes to highlight hit Ctrl+c or right click and copy and right click and hit paste I am not sure how it takes you 5 minutes to use DDI as highlight, right click, copy is less then 20 seconds for most people.

took me 11 seconds for the blue dragon and I rarely use a word editor or anything.Not a slam on you but if you do not know how to copy and paste I am having a hard time seeing ease of use for a more complex program such as the DDI MB

Really though any GM regardless of system should look at his creatures before running them.