You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 07, 2016, 06:12:15 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Pathfinder RPG  (Read 13631 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Pathfinder RPG
« on: August 09, 2009, 01:50:14 PM »
With the release of the full version of the Pathfinder RPG by Paizo on the way to my door, I was curious as to what other folks on the board might have thought about it.

Anyone other than myself?

I liked the way they gave all the classes some more juice, now you got a reason to be a sorcerer/fighter/barbarian/rogue all the way to 20th level rather than swap out some much more attractive prestige class.

(Been toying with the idea of a 'speedster' halfing sorcerer(ess?) who has fire elemental heritage. +20 to base movement.. that's one fast hobbit!)

Online HairyHeretic

  • Lei varai barbu - The true bearded one
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2006
  • Location: Ireland
  • Gender: Male
  • And the Scorpion said "Little frog .. I can swim."
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #1 on: August 09, 2009, 02:07:59 PM »
I'm not really familiar with it. Its D&D 3.75, right?

Online Myrleena

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #2 on: August 09, 2009, 02:10:37 PM »
I've been keeping track of it for just over a year now, and I'm excited about almost everything I've heard about it. ^_^

Online Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #3 on: August 09, 2009, 02:13:16 PM »
I'm not really familiar with it. Its D&D 3.75, right?

It has been referred at that. It takes a LOT of 3.5 and adds in some fixes, updates/upgrades to the mix.

And like any game out there it has it's bugs (It splits polymorph into about 12 or so spells which I think is hinky) but by and far it's got a lot of crunch for each class.

I'm sure you can find a copy of the beta floating around somewhere online, and the full version is out this month (I just got my notice from Paizo they are mailing it out..should be here in about a week)

Online Myrleena

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #4 on: August 09, 2009, 03:04:03 PM »
Actually, the comment on Polymorph is incorrect.  Polymorph allows you to replicate the spells that allow you to take the form of specific types of creatures.  Beast Shape allows animals, Plant Shape, and so forth, and Polymorph allows you to effectively use those specific (Lower level) spells.

Online Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #5 on: August 09, 2009, 03:30:44 PM »
Actually, the comment on Polymorph is incorrect.  Polymorph allows you to replicate the spells that allow you to take the form of specific types of creatures.  Beast Shape allows animals, Plant Shape, and so forth, and Polymorph allows you to effectively use those specific (Lower level) spells.

You're right..we went from 3 basic spells (Polymorph(self), Polymorph (others/Baneful Poly), Polymorph Anything) to like several specific 'form spells though.. and when you're trying to build up a shapeshifting sorcereress as a bad guy.. it eats up the spells. :D

I was a bit frustrated but it is the only thing about pathfider that fills 'ad hoc' as a fix.

I LOVE the rogue/sorcerer tricks and the barbarian and cleric ones are almost as nice.

Offline Cold Heritage

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #6 on: August 09, 2009, 06:15:42 PM »
I think it would have just been another forgotten 3rd party product if fourth edition hadn't come out and started a furious edition war.

Online Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #7 on: August 09, 2009, 06:33:49 PM »
Well it appeals to a group of players, like myself, who felt that 4th edition was dumbed down 'MMORPG' stuff on their pen and paper games. I like to play around with multiclasses, various spells that went from being SPELLS to being '1 per day/combat' talents..

4e, to me, feels nothing like DnD as I know it. I know that I am not the typical player and lots of folks like it. Pathfinder felt right.

I don't think Paizo started it as a 'version' war, but more of a way to stay afloat after losing their magazine contracts. I know a LOT of folks who are in service who were upset with the disappearence of a dead tree version of Dungeon and Dragon magazines.

Don't get me started on the 'Drivethrurpg/Paizo-gate' thing Hazbro felt was the justication for pulling the entire Wizards Line offline.

Offline Cold Heritage

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #8 on: August 09, 2009, 08:13:06 PM »
No. Fourth edition coming out started the edition war. If 4th hadn't come out (or the same batch of strawmen hadn't been trotted out to use against 4e, just like they got trotted out when 3rd came out to 'video-game'ize the hobby), nobody would've given half a glance at Pathfinder. It owes essentially all of its popularity to being the 'anti-4e' and getting the grognard dollar.

Online Myrleena

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #9 on: August 09, 2009, 08:31:59 PM »
I completely disagree with you, Cold Heritage.  You say that it would be forgotten?  I doubt it.  Every person I know who has looked at 3.x vs. Pathfinder, has said that it fixed almost all of the play balance issues in the core books.  I personally would have switched either way, just like I did from 3.0 to 3.5.

Online Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #10 on: August 09, 2009, 08:39:32 PM »
No. Fourth edition coming out started the edition war. If 4th hadn't come out (or the same batch of strawmen hadn't been trotted out to use against 4e, just like they got trotted out when 3rd came out to 'video-game'ize the hobby), nobody would've given half a glance at Pathfinder. It owes essentially all of its popularity to being the 'anti-4e' and getting the grognard dollar.

I disagree as well. It definitely addressed one or more of the key issues of 3.5. Play balance among the starting classes for one. Rogue, Barbarian and Sorcerer were classes you took a couple levels in to get to this or that prestige class (ditto fighter).. now ALL of them have teeth for the folks that want to go past 6th, 10th or higher level as a 'average' fighter/barbarian/rogue/sorcerer

Online Myrleena

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #11 on: August 10, 2009, 04:14:19 PM »
My copy arrived less than 10 minutes ago! *runs off to read*

Online Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #12 on: August 10, 2009, 06:58:25 PM »
My copy arrived less than 10 minutes ago! *runs off to read*

Hss.. ... hates you we does.. hiss

Online Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #13 on: October 31, 2009, 11:28:10 AM »
Happy Happy..

I gots the Pathfinder Bestiary in my hand.

Nice stuff.. missing some of the 'basic' monsters. (Well Blink Dogs... :D )

Nice layout, none of the 'every critter has 3 pages' writeup style of the last Monster Manual I bought.

Hmmm..

Let's see..

Presentation.: Nice glossy paper with a clear layout and presentation of each creature. The breakdown for each critter is clear, though sometimes the subject info is occasionally a bit short (but given they tried to keep it 1 critter to 1 page that is understandable.) Some of the stuff is thought provoking though (like the various classes/roles a Medusa can do..very inspiring) The icon layout on the top of each gives the critter type,  terrain and climate types.

Artwork: Fairly good as was the Core Rulebook.

Appendices: Lots of info in there. How to upgrade, add templates, and modify the critters to give them a twist or two. (they have normal templates and 'quick templates'). Additional feats, how to use some of the critters as PCs and how to ensure that the player doesn't overwelm the rest of the group (always a danger I've noticed)

And in a side note: The most common 'alternate' races in the book (Drow, Noble Drow, Tengu, and others) have been added to the Hero Lab pathfinder build. :D

Offline Chris Brady

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #14 on: November 01, 2009, 04:34:49 PM »
I'm not really familiar with it. Its D&D 3.75, right?

Not even.  It's at best 3.55.  It's nothing more than rewarmed 3.x with the same issues (Good or bad, you decide) and a spritzier covering.  It's not like they did any work, they more or less copied the D20 SRD (Which is free online) and added some minor changes.

Offline MasterMischief

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #15 on: November 08, 2009, 01:50:10 PM »
I agree with Cold Heritage.  Pahtfinger/3.75 would have been regarded as bare-faced corporate greed had WotC done it.  Has everyone already forgotten the bile flood when 3.5 was first released?  Instead, it is touted as the savior of role playing.

It may have fixed some of the minor flaws of 3.5, but retains all of the big problems I have with D&D Classes, Vancian Magic, Christmas Tree Effect, Hit Point proliferation, Armor Class.

I love Paizo.  They do some real quality work.  I just can not get behind Pathfinder.  It is little more than a banner for the anti-4e crowd.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #16 on: November 09, 2009, 10:39:35 AM »
MasterMischief, I hate to break it to you, but Pathfinder fixed nothing.  It 'nerfed' a few things (Power Attack, I mean really, was increasing the miss chance for extra damage REALLY that overpowering?  Really?) and powered up other things.  Wizards still have some save or die/suck spells, magic is still overly necessary.

This proves a few things though:  A)  Gamers HATE change.  Despise it.  All Paizo did was redress the D20 SRD (There are some spots in the PRD that are word for word copied) and people bought it.  B) With the right 'big names' and marketing, people will believe anything.  And C) Paizo has no idea how to right a game system (Go read Hideous Laughter on the PRD, just go.)

If they are happy with the system, more power to them, but for me, the same issues you have MasterMischief, I do as well.  And I DON'T LIKE 4e AT ALL, IT'S NOT MY FANTASY GAME.  I'll happily play in it, with the right people, but it's not what I want in a D&D game.

Maybe I should continue MY 3.x hack at some point...

Online Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #17 on: November 09, 2009, 10:57:25 AM »
Wow.. that is some mean stuff said. I know a LOT of guys who simply went out and bought used 2e books after 4th edition came out.

As for me thinking it was anything but another copy of 3.X.. I knew what I was getting into, I just felt it was MILES better than what Wizards put out with 4e. They (Paizo) put out a LOT more info than the guys at Wizards would for the same price.

For example I got the copy of the MM IV I got on bargain bin last year.. List price: 34.99 vs Paizo Beistary: 39.99 (last week) 220 pages vs 320. I think you got a good value out of it.

Both the Bestiary and Corebook seem to go the OLD concept of more pages for your buck. I like that. I agree that the Pathfinder RPG is basically a remint of 3e in some form (with the warts that it had.. still not happy with the polymorph 'fixes') BUT you can't tell me that the total rebuild/redesign of 4e wasn't anything but a money grab version change bigger than 3.5 was.




Offline RubySlippers

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #18 on: November 09, 2009, 11:08:13 AM »
I own DnD 1st Edition, the Rules Cyclopedia, 2nd Edition and 3.0 Edition plus the Basic Fantasy RPG (sort of a clone of these but is not DnD). 

Pathfinder though has strong merits from what I've played the classes for example are fine as solo classes regardless a bard or a fighter or a wizard. Which is for me a large change and a good one I never liked Prestige Classes that much.

I just don't see any value in buying new rules when I have the other rules to use.


Online Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #19 on: November 09, 2009, 01:29:56 PM »
Most definitely gave Fighters, Bards, Sorcerers and Clerics some teeth I thought..

4e basically did away with the need for a cleric given that you can do some sort of healing surge with every class.

Offline Chris Brady

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #20 on: November 09, 2009, 05:01:19 PM »
Most definitely gave Fighters, Bards, Sorcerers and Clerics some teeth I thought..

4e basically did away with the need for a cleric given that you can do some sort of healing surge with every class.

The 3.x Cleric needed no teeth, it and the Druid had TOO MUCH already.  And the PFRPG Fighter powers are at best 'insulting', they don't do enough to fix the perceived problem that Magic solves everything.

But then seeing as Monte Cook was involved with it, it's not surprising.  He really loves his D&D Magic, always has.

Online Myrleena

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #21 on: November 09, 2009, 05:19:51 PM »
Yeesh.  I sometimes wonder why you're so vocal in opposition when you dislike it.  I've found more than enough options to even the odds between fighters and magic-users.

Offline Brandon

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #22 on: November 09, 2009, 05:51:35 PM »
Interesting, I made a thread similar to this where myself, Kongming, and many others whos names I forget discussed the ins and outs of the Pathfinder Alpha (or maybe it was beta Im not sure). I wish I knew where that thread went so I could link it for everyone as it had some very good insights in it.

As to the argument about magic classes vs non-magic classes, I have to say thats an unimformed argument. The chief thing overlooked in the pathfinder games in that argument is the use of the use magic device skill. A skill that every class can power up. By using that skill a fighter can use a wand of Wall of force to block off opponents, a Wand of fireball to roast a group of enemies, or a wand of Fly to barrel through the air like superman. With the use of that skill and the funds a fighter, or any non-magic class, has some varied usefulness but can easily counteract that idea that "Wizards are the group"

If youre going to talk about pathfinder, and especially if youre going to say things against it I should warn you to come to this discussion prepared. I dont consider myself a fanboy but I am a huge supporter of pathfinder and find great enjoyment in mauling the uninformed arguments that often come up

Offline MasterMischief

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #23 on: November 10, 2009, 08:52:22 PM »
In my experience, magic vs. non-magic happens in pretty much every system.  I think it is the nature of the beast.  Magic allows you to do things others can not.  Magic is also the playground of the system abusers which only compounds the problem.

Your case for the Use Magical Device does not 'fix' the problem, Brandon.  It just turns everyone into a magic user.

Online Myrleena

Re: Pathfinder RPG
« Reply #24 on: November 11, 2009, 12:58:25 AM »
You may have a point, but that's kind of the point of D&D.  Everything is over the top, really and it's High Fantasy.  Not Sword and Sorcery.  I'd suggest Anima: Beyond Fantasy if you want a relatively open class-based system that penalizes casters.