Manchu wrote:

Damn, Alpharius, wish we lived closer together. The RPing would be epic.

Da Boss wrote:You don't really NEED the mat and minis to play I think - we've played 3.5 and now Pathfinder happily for years without it. You just need a group with a good imagination who won't try to quibble position too much.
I find Pathfinder to be pretty similar, but with the massive amount of stupid stuff phased out and some stuff made more interesting.

Also, the rules (a lot of them anyway) are available online.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/ nice and well laid out, generally means players can build characters and you can build monsters and treasure easily without the book.

skrulnik wrote:If you have played any Bioware/Black Isle designed RPGs on computer or console in the past, what ten years, you have been playing 3 or 3.5.

I think Icewind Dale 2 forward were all based heavily on the core D&D3+ rulesets.

Icewind Dale
Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance (on PS2 for me)
Neverwinter Nights and all expansions
Neverwinter Nights 2 and XP

Even the Knights of the Old Republic and Dragon Age series' have borrowed largely from those rules.
I might have missed some, but those are it.
I have fairly easily transitioned into playing in a Pathfinder Campaign, my first pen and paper RPG in 15 years, due to my experience with the above games.

Balance wrote:
Icewind Dale was 2nd... I think my version even used the old-style D&D logo!

KotoR was based off the Star Wars RPG Wizards did, which was an off-shoot of the d20 system. It wasn't quite compatible, and I've heard the best version of it was the recently canceled Saga edition. The early edition wasn't bad, but had some definite faults that hurt the overall 'feel' for me.

Balder's Gate: Dark Alliance, while a fun game, was really more of a Diablo clone and only vaguely used the d20 rules, if that.

Not sure about DA: O. I guess it might have some d20 influence, but not too much, really.

Manchu wrote:You don't NEED mat'n'minis in 3.5 like you don't NEED a measuring tape in 40k. Alph, if you're serious get yourself a mat and some markers from Chessex. You needn't waste money on pricey, ugly D&D minis if you don't want to--anything that will fit in a 1"x 1" sqaure on the mat will be fine. (Keep in mind that larger monsters are represented by taking up more squares.) Also, the SRD link DaBoss provided is for OGL d20 (basically, 3.5) rather than Pathfinder--just to be clear. It'll give you the basic idea about Pathfinder, of course.

Manchu wrote:Well, it's a bit like Realms meets Iron Kingdoms. There are all sorts of nation states that ape IRL cultures/periods. There's an Egyptian nation (Osirion) and an Arab region (don't remember the other names) and a French Revolution one, etc, etc., and that is what some people love. But to me it's over-generic. Balance was talking about Sandbox v. Railroad campaign styles earlier and I tend to prefer a "soft" Railroad sort of setting (i.e., a setting that heavily effects the drama-laden mostly linear plot) and that means having a more coherent world--like Dark Sun for example. Golarion is like a bunch of various campaigns all tied up together (FR) with the explanation of post-Westphalian nationality concept (IK).

Alpharius wrote:Is there a more 'singular vision' campaign setting available, something more akin to a Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms?

Da Boss wrote:Manchu: I'm not sure what you mean about the SRD I supplied- it's not the 3.5 one, it's specifically for pathfinder. Click the link, the rules are the same as in the pathfinder rulebook. We're all using it in our pathfinder games!
(It's even got pathfinder specific monsters like the goblin dog and stuff in there.)
I'd still contend that 3.5 D'n'D is fine sans minis if you've got a group with good spatial imagination and who don't try to argue too much. We've been playing 3.5 and now pathfinder for 7 years without using them. I've used them a few times, and the 4th edition game I'm playing uses a magnetic whiteboard with A3 printed grid maps and little magnetic travel checkers pieces. I find the minis/tokens work well for tactical combat, but they're not essential.
Settings wise, I do like Eberron, though it is a bit like what you've described the pathfinder setting to be. If you can track down some of the 2nd E planescape stuff, well, planescape is awesome. A friend of mine is working on a Ravenloft conversion system too, and I think Pathfinder would work really well with Darksun.

Manchu wrote:My b, DaBoss. Didn't know there was a PFSRD, so this is cool to see. Still disagree with your assessment about the mat, however, for the reason that I would want tape measures even in a friendly game of 40k. But I do like a bit of DM v. PCs feel to my games, after all.

@Alpharius: If you like the old school D&D maybe try some of the non-mainstream systems? Mouse Guard (not so much its extremely complicated big brother, Burning Wheel) comes to mind. Lack of players is lack of players. I just thought you had an established group?