Pathfinder SRD is online
- Thread starter Edhel
- Start date
Supplement Four
Mongoose
I like the changes to combat maneuvers (more structure) and the section on quickly determining NPCs.
Personally I don't think damage reducing armor fits well in the D20 rules. It may work great with other game engines but D20 wasn't really designed for that.
As anyone knows by now, I'm not huge fan of the D20 system (to remain polite), but I must admit Paizo is doing a good job here, probably better than Hasbro ever did...
Paizo makes great adventures! But I can't say I agree with their decision to stay with 3.5 as I really really loathe that game system. I looked at the Pathfinder PDF and still saw the same issues I saw in 3.5. The tweaks to certain feats, races, classes, spells, and the whole CMB CMD mechanic were fine, but I think they missed out on an opportunity to make 3.5 fun past level 10.
I have many gripes about 3.5, as I have had 2 campaigns end early because of broken rules and the insane amount of prep time required as DM. Things like iterative attacks, spell slots, immunities, damage reduction, and mandatory magic items make me sick to my stomach these days.
4E is good for D&D, it's fast, fun, and easy to learn. It has a more "gamey" feel to it than 3.5 did but I like that. It's a breeze to DM as well.
If I ran Conan again though, I'd have to go with either Savage Worlds, or possibly FantasyCraft (after I give it a good read through). I refuse to use the d20 version as is.
I have many gripes about 3.5, as I have had 2 campaigns end early because of broken rules and the insane amount of prep time required as DM. Things like iterative attacks, spell slots, immunities, damage reduction, and mandatory magic items make me sick to my stomach these days.
4E is good for D&D, it's fast, fun, and easy to learn. It has a more "gamey" feel to it than 3.5 did but I like that. It's a breeze to DM as well.
If I ran Conan again though, I'd have to go with either Savage Worlds, or possibly FantasyCraft (after I give it a good read through). I refuse to use the d20 version as is.
It looks like my own words. Betrayer of Asgard has gone flying through the room as I said "Never this shit again!". So ends sadly and without end my four years long D20 Conan campaign. I played Conan with other systems before and will come back to the old ways. We made a "summer pause", but I think my next run will be using the very simple and elegant Barbarians of Lemuria, bored as I am by number crunching and munchkin combos...
It's quite funny to see that most D20 detractors prefer DD4 to 3.5, while its most stalwart defenders just loathe it. Even more funny, the D20 fans thinks that DD4 is too much "cooperative boardgaming" and looks likes a video game. Exaxtly what the detractors of 3.5 have been saying for years about the D20 system...
As a D20 detractor myself, I tend to think that DD4 is actually better than 3.5. Actually it's quite the same "cooperative boardgaming" and "MMO p'n'p simulator" crap, only that it is simpler and more fluid.
quigs said:
Exactly! I felt the same way about Conan 2nd Edition. It failed to adress the basic mathematical issues of the game, such as attack and defence progression. You might be interested in checking out Acheronian Edition, our set of house rules for Conan. The intent was to fix the high level game, which had several gaping holes:
http://www.obsidianportal.com/campaign/conan-ae/wikis/acheronian-edition-rules
I think it is working fine now with minimum amount of trouble to convert RAW stuff to the Acheronian Edition.
We've houseruled our fantasy D&D too in the similar style as the Acheronian Edition. Unfortunately the wiki for the Netheril Edition is far less detailed than AE.
http://www.obsidianportal.com/campaign/netheril-edition/wikis/main-page
In addition to AE-like mathematical changes, most magic items have been dumped. No more stat boosters, no more several kinds of AC boost items. Weapons and armor only have +1 as a basic level of enchantment. After that, it is just additional qualities - such as "Flaming" for a sword. You can't get a +5 plate armor, for example, but you can get +1 plate armor of something worth additional +4. Characters generaly have 50% of the listed starting wealth while item costs are RAW. Thus everyone has less magic items.
Magic has been divided in to 20 spell levels according to some Monte Cook book, I think. I'm not playing a spellcaster, so I'm afraid I've given very little attention to the magic rules. I just roll a save when one is needed, heh.
Mmm, we did run a test campaign on 4E and I didn't like it very much. D&D 3.5, despite all its flaws, has fun aspect in customizing your character and in the general flow of the game. 4E felt more like a board game and characters were severely constrained by the class they chose. I'm pretty sure it is easier to GM though... but I think Savage Worlds does what 4E tries in a vastly superior way. SW is fun, fast and furious on an entirely different level.
Furthermore, 4E never felt dangerous. We were just counting hit points and at some point they ran out. Before they were low, you simple knew you wouldn't die yet. In D&D 3.5 combat felt dangerous at every round, because of the save or die effects and other dangerous stuff. Combat without a feeling of danger isn't that exciting.
This feeling persisted even though we lost the first party entirely in one fight to a TPK and several characters of the second party died too. We were playing the official starter campaign/adventure, can't remember the name - so the deaths were not caused by a sadistic GM. It is hard to put this feeling of...non-lethality in to words, as it persists even when characters die. I guess the death of characters in 4E is something like "Oh, I ran out of game credits, now I lost my game token", while in 3.5 it was more like "Goddamn, my wizard got an arrow in his eye!".
This is all player perception, I've run neither Savage nor 4E. I'd still be perfectly willing to play 4E, I just find other systems to be more fun.
Yeah, if I started to run my campaign now, I'd use Savage Worlds. However, I didn't even know it existed when I started to run my game. Converting all the stuff to SW would be too much trouble for me, although I seriously considered it for a while. I don't enjoy messing around with rules and numbers like some people do, so the conversion would have been a dreadful amount of boring work. Thus the Acheronian Edition is the second best thing.
Twin Agate Dragons
Mongoose
Majestic7 said:
I've run Conan with Savage Worlds a few times already. You really don't have to convert anything you don't want to. All characters start as humans, and you can use the sub-races from Conan d20 as archetypes in Savage Worlds. i.e. Cimmerians are good climbers, are strong, and fearless. In SW this would translate into "if you want to play a Cimmerian, consider spending points in Strength, and taking the Guts and Climb skills"
The Fantasy Companion book makes it even easier to play Conan with the basic SW rules. Most of the gear can be ported directly over, and spells can have trappings applied to make them match their Conan names.
I am running a 4E age of worms campaign right now, and having lots of fun, as are my players, but I can agree that 4E is a lot less lethal than other games. However, I see this as a strength in D&D campaigns as it helps to keep story continuity if your PC's don't die all the time
Edhel said:
Just an FYI, I am the primary creator of the above site and I have made a downloadable version of the Pathfinder SRD available on the downloads page of http://www.d20pfsrd.com (that's the same site as pathfindersrd.com).
Come on by and check out the site. It includes all monsters from both the Preview Bestiary and Bonus Bestiary that are not available on the Paizo PRD.
Better yet, volunteer to help me edit it! Email me at jreyst@gmail.com if you think you might like to get involved!
Thanks,
John (jreyst)
Torg Smith
Mongoose
Well I will first say I like D20 better than DnD 4E.
I agree that making a high level adventure for D20 will be a lot of work with the two page stat NPC if you want to fully detail them. I think the DnD 4E makes a lot of work for the DM when you need to keep rolling the saves for each state on each of the mobs every round to get rid of effects.
I think DnD 4E has done some good and bad things.
Paizo did a couple good things with PathfinderRPG.
In pretty much any level based system the higher levels will be more involved in creating content. I have considered running a game where I tell the players to roll up (I prefer point buy) characters at level eight and not give out experience points. I think that some players would not like this. :twisted:
Thank You,
Torg Smith
I agree that making a high level adventure for D20 will be a lot of work with the two page stat NPC if you want to fully detail them. I think the DnD 4E makes a lot of work for the DM when you need to keep rolling the saves for each state on each of the mobs every round to get rid of effects.
I think DnD 4E has done some good and bad things.
- One of my main gripes with DnD 4E is that most the powers feel like they are one round long. Granted that "until save" will last longer, it does not have that same feel as AD&D that I like.
- The fact that the Magic-User can cast Magic Missiles each round at first level kicks butt. I always thought that after the Magic-User cast his one spell then broke out his dagger to step in with the Fighter was kind of strange.
- The direction WotC is going with the skill challenges is pretty cool and I would like to see more companies pursue this concept as it could add so much more than the RPGs extreme concentration on combat above all else.
- I think they stopped short on the suggested build. I think they should have provided the builds to at least level ten for the less experienced RPGers.
Paizo did a couple good things with PathfinderRPG.
- They made cantrips unlimited cast that gave the benefit of the 4E powers at low level to 3E.
- They reduced the number of skills so the characters become more capable. This is a trend that is happening with many different RPG developers.
- The high level game is still going to be a pain for developing anything with class levels for encounters.
In pretty much any level based system the higher levels will be more involved in creating content. I have considered running a game where I tell the players to roll up (I prefer point buy) characters at level eight and not give out experience points. I think that some players would not like this. :twisted:
Thank You,
Torg Smith
[DING!]
[DING!]
Round's over! Back to your corners.
The D&D debate on versions is endless. It's okay to have a personal preference and to not care for alternate versions. It does make one person right and another wrong. It's just "different". Lets leave personal preferences--personal and not have another tiresome debate over the issue.
[DING!]
Round's over! Back to your corners.
The D&D debate on versions is endless. It's okay to have a personal preference and to not care for alternate versions. It does make one person right and another wrong. It's just "different". Lets leave personal preferences--personal and not have another tiresome debate over the issue.
Twin Agate Dragons
Mongoose
I, for one, welcome our new Pathfinder overlord. :shock: :lol:
