Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG

Well, having gone there and downloaded the Public Beta PHB (HINT HINT GW) had a look through it, I have to say, this stuff rocks. It's 3.5, but bettah! The Skills system has been revamped, Hit Dice have been tweeked about, the XP system is smoother etc etc. They have basically taken the good bits from 4e (like, the two good bits) and meshed it in with 3.5e under the OGL.

The result?
All my games are switching to Pathfinder.
Open Beta is available Here (Need to sign up and download) and you can pre order the PDF versions coming September 2009 for only $9.99 each.

Paizo were the guys who did Dragon before WoC killed it right?

Kid_Kyoto wrote:Paizo were the guys who did Dragon before WoC killed it right?

No idea, though it sounds like something WotC would do.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:Paizo were the guys who did Dragon before WoC killed it right?

Yes

Edit: They moved dragon to an online release thing though. I don't know if they ever went through with it. They haven't released much via they pay service yet. Just the Revenant race and there will be an upcoming assassin class. I got the Revenant off of rapid share. It's ok, nice fluff a few extra feats.

Also GWAR!, why so much rage for 4th?

Some people just seem to have blind hatred (as in they hate it a lot, not that they are blind) for 4e. I'm a huge fan of it.

From what I remember of Pathfinder, though, is that it just gave everybody more class features, but did nothing to fix the massive power gap between casters and non-casters, or a litany of other balance issues.

Just like Gwar! wouldn't play 4e, I wouldn't play Pathfinder/3P/whatever you want to call it.

Ogiwan wrote:Just like Gwar! wouldn't play 4e, I wouldn't play Pathfinder/3P/whatever you want to call it.

Well, I am not one to stop people willingly playing crap games. It's your choice.

All 4e did was to make WoW on paper. The changes to the Magic, Alignment and Classes were unnecessary. 4 Classes? Oh wow, so much choice. No Bard? No Sorcerer? No Monk? 4e is a crap system, and I am glad groups like Paizo continue to support the last Good D&D ruleset.

Gwar! wrote:

Ogiwan wrote:Just like Gwar! wouldn't play 4e, I wouldn't play Pathfinder/3P/whatever you want to call it.

Well, I am not one to stop people willingly playing crap games. It's your choice.

All 4e did was to make WoW on paper. The changes to the Magic, Alignment and Classes were unnecessary. 4 Classes? Oh wow, so much choice. No Bard? No Sorcerer? No Monk? 4e is a crap system, and I am glad groups like Paizo continue to support the last Good D&D ruleset.

Errr.
All of those classes (the monk is coming, but not out yet) have been released via the expansion books as well as a significant number more. As have additional races (Players Handbook 2 and Dragon/Dungeon have published things).

It's one thing to not like the system, but try to get the facts right.

Oh, I'm sorry, I was under the Assumption the PLAYERS HANDBOOK would let me PLAY the game, rather than force me to buy several 50$ books.

I don't like 4th ed. simply because it fixed something that wasn't broken. I keep hearing about this so called "power gap" but I haven't seen it. I suspect the real problem with with 3.5 is the same problem that will plague 4.0 as well: people are too lazy/greedy/whiny to balance things themselves. DM's don't want to be bothered with actually having to make their own rules; Players don't want to be bothered with NOT making a powerbuild every time around; and NOBODY can be bothered to stop whining about their class's weaknesses and/or all the other class's advantages.

Our group has enough books and supplements to make ANY class broken, no matter HOW underpowered it supposedly is. And that's the point. D&D ISN'T a videogame: In theory, you can't get 'stuck' because you didn't get enough levels, or missed a weapon/skill/spell that's essential to progressing forward; In theory you can't get so powerful that everything through the rest of the adventure/campaign is a one hit/spell 'kill'. If the players find themselves in over their head because the GM underestimated the threat of a given situation, then it's his responsibility to fix it, either by handwaving something, or by allowing the player's ideas to work even if they shouldn't. If the GM gives something the green light, and later finds it to be unbalancing, it his/her responsibility to correct it, preferably 'in game' with a special scenario, or by just sitting down with the group and explaining what's being changed, and why. It's the players' responsibility to accept the GM's rulings and changes; An agreement (often unspoken, but always understood) is entered into by everybody when a new game is started: "We are here to have fun. Players will abide by the GM's decisions, and not try to ruin everybody else's good time. GM's will provide a fair, fun, setting and adventure(s), and try not to arbitrarily handwave too much stuff 'just because'.

Computers simply don't have the ability to ad-lib on the spot, and therefore computer 'rpgs' will ALWAYS be inferior, and subject to a certain amount of railroading. Turning 4th ed into a P&P WoW clone just insults the genre, and undermines the game.

RPG players pride themselves on a certain amount of ingenuity and creativity, it's a shame they don't want to use it when encountering rules and balance issues.

First they dumbed down M:TG (Remember when they they used the word 'Bury'? It was understood that it meant 'destroyed', and that the target couldn't be regenerated. NOW, on the other hand, they've simply replaced the term with the definition). Result: Magic for Morons.
Now they've dumbed down D&D. Result: D&D for Dummies.

Gwar! wrote:Oh, I'm sorry, I was under the Assumption the PLAYERS HANDBOOK would let me PLAY the game, rather than force me to buy several 50$ books.

Welcome to 3.5.. and 2e and 3.0... welcome to DnD GWAR! enjoy your stay.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lordhat wrote:Computers simply don't have the ability to ad-lib on the spot, and therefore computer 'rpgs' will ALWAYS be inferior, and subject to a certain amount of railroading. Turning 3e into a P&P Diablo clone just insults the genre, and undermines the game.

With just a small tweak your argument works in the past as well!

I don't get it.... how does actual role-playing compare with mindless mouse button mashing?

Lordhat wrote:I don't get it.... how does actual role-playing compare with mindless mouse button mashing?

It doesn't. It just seems the target Demographic for 4e was rather accurate.

Lordhat wrote:I don't get it.... how does actual role-playing compare with mindless mouse button mashing?

It doesn't, what are you even talking about?

Gwar! wrote:It doesn't. It just seems the target Demographic for 4e was rather accurate.

Nerds that like P&P games?

Lordhat wrote:I don't like 4th ed. simply because it fixed something that wasn't broken. I keep hearing about this so called "power gap" but I haven't seen it. I suspect the real problem with with 3.5 is the same problem that will plague 4.0 as well: people are too lazy/greedy/whiny to balance things themselves. DM's don't want to be bothered with actually having to make their own rules; Players don't want to be bothered with NOT making a powerbuild every time around; and NOBODY can be bothered to stop whining about their class's weaknesses and/or all the other class's advantages.

Our group has enough books and supplements to make ANY class broken, no matter HOW underpowered it supposedly is. And that's the point. D&D ISN'T a videogame: In theory, you can't get 'stuck' because you didn't get enough levels, or missed a weapon/skill/spell that's essential to progressing forward; In theory you can't get so powerful that everything through the rest of the adventure/campaign is a one hit/spell 'kill'. If the players find themselves in over their head because the GM underestimated the threat of a given situation, then it's his responsibility to fix it, either by handwaving something, or by allowing the player's ideas to work even if they shouldn't. If the GM gives something the green light, and later finds it to be unbalancing, it his/her responsibility to correct it, preferably 'in game' with a special scenario, or by just sitting down with the group and explaining what's being changed, and why. It's the players' responsibility to accept the GM's rulings and changes; An agreement (often unspoken, but always understood) is entered into by everybody when a new game is started: "We are here to have fun. Players will abide by the GM's decisions, and not try to ruin everybody else's good time. GM's will provide a fair, fun, setting and adventure(s), and try not to arbitrarily handwave too much stuff 'just because'.

Computers simply don't have the ability to ad-lib on the spot, and therefore computer 'rpgs' will ALWAYS be inferior, and subject to a certain amount of railroading. Turning 4th ed into a P&P WoW clone just insults the genre, and undermines the game.

RPG players pride themselves on a certain amount of ingenuity and creativity, it's a shame they don't want to use it when encountering rules and balance issues.

First they dumbed down M:TG (Remember when they they used the word 'Bury'? It was understood that it meant 'destroyed', and that the target couldn't be regenerated. NOW, on the other hand, they've simply replaced the term with the definition). Result: Magic for Morons.
Now they've dumbed down D&D. Result: D&D for Dummies.

I'm sooo glad somebody finally said it. I remember when we used to spend half our D&D sessions just talking out various rules alterations. We would even do it when we all went out to a restaurant in the mid-session break, and boy did the other diners give us some funny looks. Then RPGA came around, then Living Greyhawk, and before you know it, the scourge of the entire RPG world, Dungeons and Dragons Online. It went from a dozen or so creative, imaginitive people enjoying the game to a bunch of harried nerds who all of a sudden have to fill out more paperwork and attend more meeting (Cons) for their so-called hobby than they do for their IT jobs.

Typeline wrote:

Lordhat wrote:I don't get it.... how does actual role-playing compare with mindless mouse button mashing?

It doesn't, what are you even talking about?

This:

Typeline wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lordhat wrote:Computers simply don't have the ability to ad-lib on the spot, and therefore computer 'rpgs' will ALWAYS be inferior, and subject to a certain amount of railroading. Turning 3e into a P&P Diablo clone just insults the genre, and undermines the game.

With just a small tweak your argument works in the past as well!

Diablo was nothing more than mashing the mouse button a fast as you could.............

Lordhat wrote:Diablo was nothing more than mashing the mouse button a fast as you could.............

But what's your point? Ok, diablo had a lot of mouse clicks, I have no idea how you can equate that to 3.5 DnD. WoW has stuff in it, but I have no idea how anyone is equating that too DnD either. It sounds to me that people who say 4e equals WoW have probably not played 4e or WoW. It's just a catchy little remark to throw around to make you sound super cool and edgy, because you still play 3.5.

The reason people compare WoW and 4e is because they are both crap and dumbed down to attract a mass market, rather than providing a quality experience.

Gwar! wrote:The reason people compare WoW and 4e is because they are both crap and dumbed down to attract a mass market, rather than providing a quality experience.

Well that's juts like, your opinion, man



Also, they aren't really dumbed down. 4e is just different and you have to know your math if your raiding on WoW. But then again, I don't play WoW anymore.

If I was going to play D&D again, I'd just play 3rd, but that's primarily because most of my resources are 3rd edition books.

I'm sure 4th could be fun if you had a group with the right mindset. Really, when you're playing an RPG, the group and the DM has a lot more to do with whether or not it's fun and it works than what edition or resources you decide to use.

Hordini wrote:If I was going to play D&D again, I'd just play 3rd, but that's primarily because most of my resources are 3rd edition books.

I'm sure 4th could be fun if you had a group with the right mindset. Really, when you're playing an RPG, the group and the DM has a lot more to do with whether or not it's fun and it works than what edition or resources you decide to use.

Agreed. I've been looking for a group that will actually roleplay since 3.0 came out.

Yup, it's all about the group. One of the best groups I ever played with was during the 3.0 days. Our DM was excellent, and that helped a lot.

I played a bit with a group in college, who swore by 2nd edition. It was fun, but I felt like it didn't really capture the magic that my old group had, so I didn't stick with it.

I have to admit that I have not played 4.0 yet (my game group played 3.5 and I moved away from the area and have not found a new group yet) but I have read through the rulebooks for 4.0.

From what I can see, it seems the PC's are pretty much invincible, being able to perform a seemingly near unlimited quantity of healing rushes/day and if you class each individual session of combat as "an encounter" (or if you take a quick rest before moving on to the next room) you can then make another healing surge in the next combat after having used some more healing surges to replenish all your HP while waiting. Although this is dependent on having a rather indulgent DM.

It is not quite up there with the unkillable characters in the Starwars RPG, but it is certainly getting closer. Some members of my gaming group lost characters in quests using the 3.5 rules but I don't really see something like that happening very often in 4.0. Unless I am missing something here.

I am also less than impressed at the lack of classes, and the lack of options within those classes. "Oh yes, you can do anything you can imagine... but you can only do things you can imagine that are on this rather short list..."

One thing I do like is the inclusion of some generic stats in the monster manual at the end that lets you play as some of the more unusual races (although it includes races that are already in the 4.0 rulebook ). It still does not let you create a character from any of the sentient races that are presented within the D&D universe, but I guess it is better than nothing.

I am still waiting for the release of a D&D game where I can create my Lich Paladain fighting to maintain the balance between life and unlife in the gaming world.

SilverMK2 wrote:I am still waiting for the release of a D&D game where I can create my Lich Paladain fighting to maintain the balance between life and unlife in the gaming world.

Simple, play Pathfinder but ignore the LG Class Restriction

Gwar! wrote:Simple, play Pathfinder but ignore the LG Class Restriction

Pft. But then I would need to find a gaming group that is willing to be converted to the Pathfinder rules.

Either that or stop taking my medication so I can play with all my split personalities.

SilverMK2 wrote:It is not quite up there with the unkillable characters in the Starwars RPG, but it is certainly getting closer.

I thought characters in Star Wars were pretty fragile, especially at low levels, due to the large amount of damage common weapons like blasters can do. What makes them so "unkillable?"

Hordini wrote:I thought characters in Star Wars were pretty fragile, especially at low levels, due to the large amount of damage common weapons like blasters can do. What makes them so "unkillable?"

I seem to recall being able to spend action points to heal yourself for as long as you had action points and a number of other such tricks (it has been a while since I played it, as we only really played it while we were waiting for new campaigns etc for D&D and D20 Modern to be written in our GG, so I might be a bit vague on the rules now). Plus I seem to remember having stupidly high saves even at a low level, certainly compared to my D&D characters and D20 Modern characters anyway...

You're talking about D20 Star Wars, right? Not the really old Star Wars RPG?

I don't remember that stuff, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything since I haven't cracked my Star Wars D20 book in awhile. Doesn't help that it's on the other side of the Atlantic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'll check it out when I get back though.

Hordini wrote:You're talking about D20 Star Wars, right? Not the really old Star Wars RPG?

I don't remember that stuff, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything since I haven't cracked my Star Wars D20 book in awhile. Doesn't help that it's on the other side of the Atlantic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'll check it out when I get back though.

Yeah, it was the D20 version. Not sure what edition (if there even is one, as I say, we weren't really into it that much).

And good luck swimming back to get it :O

Edit: I may of course just be mis-remembering and therefore talking out of my bum. But I certainly remember talking to our DM about it a few times.

SilverMK2 wrote:I have to admit that I have not played 4.0 yet (my game group played 3.5 and I moved away from the area and have not found a new group yet) but I have read through the rulebooks for 4.0.

From what I can see, it seems the PC's are pretty much invincible, being able to perform a seemingly near unlimited quantity of healing rushes/day and if you class each individual session of combat as "an encounter" (or if you take a quick rest before moving on to the next room) you can then make another healing surge in the next combat after having used some more healing surges to replenish all your HP while waiting. Although this is dependent on having a rather indulgent DM.

Having played and DMed 4th edition pretty heavily let me quell your worries. Each character has a limited number of healing surges per day. If you have something like 10 of them, you have a lot. Once during each encounter you have a Second Wing that gives you a use of a healing surge and a +2 bonus on your next save (if you have poison damage on you or your on fire or something). During the short rests each party would take while looking around the battlefield, looting bodies (if applicable) you can use any number of healing surges to bring your HP back up. But once you have run out of those that you have for the day, they don't come back. No one can heal you, not a cleric (their minor action word of healing ability needs you to use your surges), not a potion (needs you to use your surges) but a Paladin can with Lay on Hands (uses his surge for you). I'd say people are definitely not invincible, but it may seem that way because damage now comes in smaller packages. Before you'd have things flinging off around 50 damage on an attack, now that is a pretty high number. Before people could have pretty high hit points if they rolled well, now your HP gain is static (but you can get more through feats and some paragon paths). Sticking to the rules people probably won't die incredibly often unless they do stupid things, but the game assume people know how to play now. So if a character runs off by himself he won't make it. More team work is required. And as for each encounter as a limiter for use of your abilities at least you don't have to keep track of days as a measure for the use of your abilities anymore.

SilverMK2 wrote:I am also less than impressed at the lack of classes, and the lack of options within those classes. "Oh yes, you can do anything you can imagine... but you can only do things you can imagine that are on this rather short list..."

One thing I do like is the inclusion of some generic stats in the monster manual at the end that lets you play as some of the more unusual races (although it includes races that are already in the 4.0 rulebook ). It still does not let you create a character from any of the sentient races that are presented within the D&D universe, but I guess it is better than nothing.

There is a pretty good amount of variety. Like, lets say for example a Paladin with a dagger. Pretty hard to do in 3.5? You can roll a paladin, give him weapon focus, weapon expertise, get powerful throw, get some magical throwing daggers, TWF (you might need pretty crazy stats to do all this) and now you can throw some pretty sweet daggers while your smiting with them. In 4th the Paladin with Daggers becomes a more defining characteristic, he isn't just a paladin with daggers. He would probably take the Rogue multiclass feat, give himself stealth as a skill now (there aren't ranks anymore so he won't be bad at it if he does this late in his career), he can use a sneak attack once per encounter now. He can build around that with various combat feats or he could go the other route by taking the Sorcerer multiclass feat. Now he needs high str and cha, but that's fine. His sorcerer powers are going to rock out some pretty hard damage but he's still a paladin but now he can use that sweet dagger instead of a holy symbol for all of his powers. He will be really good in close combat because he is looking for the benefits his abilities give him when he hits and daggers are slightly better at hitting things (a higher proficiency bonus than most long blades) than normal and his dagger also give him ranged punch with both his sorcerer powers and his ranged paladin powers (of which there are now a lot, depending on how you build your character).

I agree in 3.5 you could definitely build a character out of any race. But as a DM I was never really fond of that, I'd have players sitting down at my table ready to try and play Ogres and Mindflayers right after that Monsterous Races book came out. It wasn't a good time, because those things really unbalanced the game. But if you still have a desire to play monsters you can always stat them up and hand them to your players. It's easier creating races now as there is kind of a formula. Two stats get a +2 bonus (if they are on the same defsense bonus they get a defense bonus on some other defense), +2 to two skills, a couple languages (choices between different languages), maybe some other racial stuff (dwarves have a ton of racials still) and then maybe an encounter power.

SilverMK2 wrote:I am still waiting for the release of a D&D game where I can create my Lich Paladain fighting to maintain the balance between life and unlife in the gaming world.

They released revenants on DDI. But I rapidshared it off of /tg/. If you don't mind that the race line says Revenant instead of Lich (you can seriously just call yourself a lich) you could play a Rev Paladin of the Raven Queen because balance between life and unlife are her thing.

I also did not enjoy 3.5 or the supposed 4.0. I would offer another suggestion though- skip fourth edition altogether, and step right into 5th. One 20 dollar book gets you a combination GMG, PHB and Hacklopedia of beast in one convenient package. It features the death of 'rounds' and instead uses seconds and a count system. As an introductory system, it will only take your players to level 5, but expansions and Hackmaster Advanced are already in the works. This is a sampler product, so it does only contain 4 characters and classes.
http://www.kenzerco.com/product_info.php?products_id=670