Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder Lesson? Is one big honkin book intimidating?

[Stormonu]

If I hadn't already been into D&D/RPGs, there's no way I would have bought into a game with an initial book the size of the Pathfinder hardcover, PDF or not.

However, as an experienced gamer, the book was great in all things except the cost of the beast. Having it available as a $10 PDF was the thing that got me to buy into the line.

 

[caudor]

*talking*
Oh my god
Becky, look at her book
Its so big
She looks like one of those geek guys girlfriends
Who understands those geek guys
They only talk to her because she looks like a total geek
I mean her book
It's just so big
I can't believe it's so square
It's just out there
I mean, it's gross
Look, she's just so geeky

*rap*
I like big books and I can not lie...

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Book size never troubled me, but then again, I'm a HEROphile.

 

[Argyle King]

While I do not own Pathfinder, I do play games which have somewhat large books, so - no, size of the books doesn't bother me.

That being said, I'd actually prefer the content being split into two books if possible. The reason being that it's easier for a new group to pass information around a table if the GM who is trying to learn to run the game doesn't have to compete for the book with the players who are trying to learn to play the game.

 

[avin]

D&D won't move out from PHB, MM and DMG... it's like D&D without beholders or dragons

 

[delericho]

There are many things I really like about Pathfinder, but the size of the Core Rulebook is not among them. IMO, if they needed that much material, they should have split it into two books.

That said, I'm firmly of the opinion that 5e should not need so much material. My preference is very much for a single, reasonably sized (sub-300-page) Core Rulebook. Incidentally, unlike the PF CR, this should include a small but representative bestiary.

If the game won't fit in that space, it is too complex.

YMMV, of course.

 

[tlantl]

is it any worse than having three good sized books to lug around?

I for one have never been intimidated by a book's size. In my youth I would read dozens of books a month. I have a massive collection of old paperbacks I read as the whim takes me. The dryness of the material will put you to sleep but it's size shouldn't be a consideration.

 

[IronWolf]

I don't have an issue with size of the Pathfinder book. I liked that I only had to buy one book to get a look at Pathfinder (okay, the Bestiary as well if I was going to run). Even today I still like that I just have to grab that one book off the shelf for most core rule look ups.

I can see that some might be intimidated. I am not sure what I would have thought if I was completely new to the system. But as an established RPG gamer, no issues with the book being one book or the size of it.

 

[Lwaxy]

No, if anything, if there is not just junk in it, more means more value for me.

The PF books are usually very well done and worth the money.

I would be more put off by small books, which may also mean limited options.

 

[IronWolf]

That said, I'm firmly of the opinion that 5e should not need so much material. My preference is very much for a single, reasonably sized (sub-300-page) Core Rulebook. Incidentally, unlike the PF CR, this should include a small but representative bestiary.

If the game won't fit in that space, it is too complex.

The next version is supposed to meet a multitude of play styles. This might be an area where it is difficult to do so, simply from the physical size of the book. The people that want a simple, rules-light game can certainly get everything they need in less than 300 pages, but what about the people that want all the dials turned to complex? It will be much harder to address that crowd with a 300 page book including a small bestiary in 300 pages.