Sincere and unbiased.

[Glade Riven]

One thing I'd recommend is taking a few "lessons" from 4e with some of the combat prep. I've found things like minions and only statting out what you'll need (verses everything) to be quite handy at cutting down on prep time.

 

[Votan]

One thing I'd recommend is taking a few "lessons" from 4e with some of the combat prep. I've found things like minions and only statting out what you'll need (verses everything) to be quite handy at cutting down on prep time.

I have found the Adventure Paths to be a lifesaver as a Pathfinder DM. They make an enormous difference in the preparation time and tend to be callibrated to be fairly tough.

[although I think my players may be sick of getting diseases in the current adventure . . . ]

 

[Glade Riven]

Adventure paths aren't really my style, mostly because I'd have to railroad more than I'd like in order to keep the players on track. Sometimes it's hard to stop a group that insists on self-destructing the plot.

 

[Volaran]

Adventure paths aren't really my style, mostly because I'd have to railroad more than I'd like in order to keep the players on track. Sometimes it's hard to stop a group that insists on self-destructing the plot.

Very understandable. Whenever I have run one of the adventure paths (particularly with players who have not played in one before) we have to set certain expectations about making characters tied to the AP background, who are likely to be interested in the presented plot hooks, etc.

It seems to work pretty consistently, but I can certainly understand that Adventure Paths are not for every group.

 

[Walking Dad]

One of the above mentioned sites also has a nice free download section:

PFRPG_SRD.pdf
View Download

...

4e is no "classic D&D". It's wargaming, taken to 11. ...

"Medieval Wargames"

Looks more like 4e is with wargaming very close to the classic.

But I prefer Pathfinder slightly more since the last months.

 

[Votan]

Adventure paths aren't really my style, mostly because I'd have to railroad more than I'd like in order to keep the players on track. Sometimes it's hard to stop a group that insists on self-destructing the plot.

I think you need to have a consensus among the group that they would like to accomplish the goals of the adventure path. All RPGS require buy-in between the parties and my current party is happy to treat the path as a puzzle to be sorted out. Not every 3.5 group I have DMed would have worked as well; one would have worked very poorly in an adventure path.

But it is the feature that makes DMing viable for me in Pathfinder; otherwise I'd have to plead for a different system, I suspect.

 

[almeidafreak]

Ok, I'm really sorry about the major thread bump, but you've been the most friendly, unbiased and informative crowd so far, and this thread's been a really healthy discussion.

I got the Core Rulebook and the Bestiary, and I'm loving it so far. It's exacly what I was looking for, and I'm very happy with my purchase. The writing and the art on the book are outrageously awesome, and so is the fluff.

I don't have many questions so far, but I'd really like to know how are the fighter and the monk playing out. I looked around on this matter and, other than here, it seems that the RPG community had gone under a major loss of rationality and education. I couldn't find a single insightful discussion on this!!

I have this player that'll certainly want to play either class, and he's the complainer type. So I would like to be really honest with my group and warn them about the remaining power gap between the classes, so that there is no whining later

I know there is a gap (and I expect to, as I stated before), but I would like to know is the Fighter has really been tweaked to be a viable class, and how exacly is the monk's status.

One other thing: you guys think it's possible to learnthe game by playing it? Because the Core Rulebook is a gargantuan mastodon counting 570+ pages, and I'm pretty sure my players will not (want to) have the time to read it!

Thanks again!

 

[Dark Mistress]

Yes with the more feats, weapon training and armor training the fighter closed the gap. How much I think it debatable on a few factors. For one who else is in the group, how common magic items are, what you fight etc.

As far as learning as you go? yes you can but there is a lot of little changes. I still find myself defaulting to 3.5 rules cause i am just so use to them and not until later I remember pathfinder changed it. So yes you can but just be aware that will happen and let the group know. Pathfinder has a lot of little rules changes, for the most part all for the better but it is hard to remember them all even if you do read the whole book in advance.

 

[Mojo_Rat]

fighters in Pf are really good. for single target damage very few things competevsith them with the new combat maneuver rules they can control the battlefield to a limited extent though my experience for this is low and mid levels.

monks are better in Pf but suffer from MAD still the apt variant zen archer I hear is really good though.

 

[almeidafreak]

Thanks a lot fro replying guys.

I'm really glad to hear this! I'm finishing reading the feats right now. There are really many rules to learn, and I forgot most of them, since it's been a while since I played 3.5. I'm starting fresh new, really.

My players also don't retain much 3.5 knowledge (nor 4e, for that matter....they're REALLY oblivious -_-)

Good to hear it about monks too!

I'll study the rules hard and try playing without having them read it, let's see how it turns out. Actually, if I see there's no way to go on, I'll make a shot version of some of the most important points...

Thanks a lot!