Pathfinder RPG

[Mr. Fed]

So yesterday I took my son to Game Empire in Pasadena (it was open on the 4th) because he wanted Pokemon cards. I saw, and picked up, the Pathfinder core book. (God, the markup at a game store! Ridiculous. But it's instant gratification.)

I've been meaning to pick it up because I've decided I just don't like D&D 4e, and I read a fair number of reviews indicating that Pathfinder is a very good successor to 3.5e, which I vastly prefer.

Do other people have experience with it? Any recommended web resources, or particularly highly recommended sourcebooks?

[hentzau]

It's funny, I had the exact opposite reaction to 3.5/4E. I had tried to get a game of 3.5 going, and me and my gaming group just couldn't get our brains wrapped around the...well, I guess I'll call it the DENSITY of 3.5. But we were all able to instantly grok 4E. I've been running a 4E campaign ever since it came out, and have been going to the D&D Encounters sessions when I can make them.

Maybe I should give Pathfinder a look-see. I don't have time to do another game, but I would like to see if I could embrace Pathfinder better than 3.5.

[malichai11]

My issue with Pathfinder is that it didn't fix the right problems. The system still bogs down terribly at higher levels, they did very little to help make encounter design easier for GMs, and pure martial classes are still outclassed by magic classes. That's me just bitching about system design though. If you don't like 4e, and like 3.5, it's an improvement on vanilla 3.5. I'm just irritated that it wasn't improved enough, and that they used their open beta test not as a way to garner feedback and improve their game, but simply as a way to advertise their game.

So, um, no, I guess I don't have any links for resources or what-nots.

[hentzau]

Oh yeah. I do have the first four or five Pathfinder modules for 3.5, along with several player guides. No clue if they would be helpful/useful to you, but I would be willing to part with them if you want them.

(Rise of the Runelords. I liked at least the first module, and that was where we bogged down in trying to understand the rules.)

[Zurai]

they used their open beta test not as a way to garner feedback and improve their game, but simply as a way to advertise their game.

That's not true at all. There were quite a few improvements that were direct results of beta feedback.

Your issue is that you didn't want Pathfinder, you wanted D&D Pathfinder Brand Entirely New Edition. Pathfinder is intentionally and specifically made to be backwards-compatible with 3.5 material essentially out of the box (little to no conversion needed), so it was literally impossible for them to entirely fix things like the divide between high-level martial characters and high-level spellcasters.

What they did do was rein in the spellcasters (mostly be nerfing the big spell categories; polymorph spells are way weaker, save-or-dies don't actually kill you, immunity spells mostly don't actually make you immune any more; also, cleric self-buffs got heavily nerfed, so no more clerics outdoing fighters) and bump up the melee characters (for example, fighters have bonuses to will saves vs fear, bonuses to hit and damage with weapon categories similar to how rangers get bonuses vs favored enemies, and improvement in their ability to wear armor effectively, plus several new fighter-only and fighter-oriented feats that help even things up at high levels). In fact, you can reasonably expect a high-level fighter to be able to kill a single monster of his level with no problem simply due to the fact that they do massive damage now. The problem with Fighters isn't in combat, it's out of combat.

Anyway, Mr. Fed, you can check out the entirety of the Pathfinder Core Rulebook and Pathfinder Bestiary for free by reading the Pathfinder Reference Document. The just-released GameMastery Guide and the released-at-the-end-of-this-month Advanced Player's Guide will also be added to the PRD soon (minus art and setting-specific information, which is generally very limited; in the Core Rulebook the only thing that's excluded is the list of deities for Clerics to worship).

[Arcanis]

As a big D&D nerd i can say most people i know who played both prefer 3.5 since pathfinder failed to balance things like they claimed. I haven't done much with it personally since the beta testing days but could glance over it and point out some of the pitfalls it has compared to 3.5.

[Smoove_B]

Not to completely derail your new RPG experience, but I recently discovered Dark Dungeons which is a free D20 conversion of the original AD&D system.

Since my practical experience with paper-based D&D ended with a brief foray into the second edition rules, I was pretty happy to see this conversion. I guess if you were really into the 3.5 rules, this might just be fun to read for nostalgia purposes. But I'd never heard of the Pathfinder system so thanks for sharing.

[Zurai]

As a big D&D nerd i can say most people i know who played both prefer 3.5 since pathfinder failed to balance things like they claimed. I haven't done much with it personally since the beta testing days but could glance over it and point out some of the pitfalls it has compared to 3.5.

It doesn't have any pitfalls that 3.5 doesn't have in greater depth, and it DOES fix several serious problems. For example, there is no more "CoDzilla" (Cleric or Druid -zilla, referring to the fact that in 3.5, Clerics and Druids could perform basically every role in the party simultaneously); most of the Cleric self-buffs got hit pretty badly with the nerf stick, and Druid shapeshifting is a pale shadow of its former self (all polymorph effects are a pre-defined stat change plus a collection of pre-defined abilities based on which creature you polymorph into). There's also a reason to take Fighter and Paladin past 2nd level.

Actually, I take that back. There's one thing: multiclassing is painful now because every character has incentive to stay in their primary class all the way to 20. Lots of people wouldn't call that a bad thing, since lots of people objected to the rampant multiclassing in 3.5. Personally, I could take it or leave it.

[Peacedog]

I have read the core Pathfinder book. My take:

1. It's still 3.5e D&D. And it's much closer to 3.5e D&D than, say, Monty Cook's Arcana Evolved (which is also still 3.5e D&D, just with more difference). It will reflect 3.5e D&D in everything. The good and the bad.

2. A complaint about 3.5e D&D was combat could drag. I see no reason why Pathfinder would be otherwise. But I have never played it, mind you. 3.5e added some elegance to the mechanics (how ability scores work/all positive numbers/things like that) but also a lot of complexity. A 12th level character has a lot to think about just getting dressed in the morning, never mind what s/he is going to have for breakfast, or actually spend the day doing.

3. I like that they tried to spice up the classes. D&D fighters are bland; you get weapon specialization and a lot of feats. Pathfinder added more to the class, though it's still a little bland relative to the other classes (most of your powers are still passive, but there are more of them and they represent a nice, significant boost to fighters, who will likely show out more in terms of basic combat performance). But on the whole, every class seems to have more inherent powers available. There's more flavor. It's a little more like Arcana Evolved in this respect (though it doesn't go quite as far; AE has the best versions of a Paladin and Monk I've yet seen and most classes have quite a few inherent powers/abilities). Bear in mind I only ever read the core D&D rule books. I never got up to Players Hanbook 5 or anything. I can't speak to added classes or mechanics. I'm going on a comparison of Pathfinder Core book -> 3.5e PHB.

4. I understand rules for grappling are overhauled as part of the "combat maneuver" system. The system looks interesting but it's another thing to keep track of (and remember to use). Part of the problem with 3.5e D&D is that there are many, many things to keep track of and remember to use. I understand 3.5e grappling is considered broken but I can't recall why (something to do with relative sizes, I think). Of the list of things wrong with 3.5e, I figure grappling to be low on the list (but, otoh, easier to fix).

If I was going to play a 3.5ish Fantasy RPG, my preferences would be: Arcana Evolved > Pathfinder > D&D.

I have mixed feelings myself about 4e D&D. I know lots of people have enjoyed 3.5e D&D but it seems to me like it's a better fit for the computer than a table top. 4e's attempts to fix that (While still remaining digitally friendly ) were interesting, to say the least.

[Mr. Fed]

Early impressions:

1. The core book is huge. Good production values.

2. 3.5e combat can be complex. This seems to explain it better.

3. Yes, it adds a bunch of fun stuff to each basic class. Bloodlines for sorcerers, etc. Nice.


I think I may use it to introduce my 9 year old to D&D.

[Zurai]

I think I may use it to introduce my 9 year old to D&D.

That actually made me remember a HUGE advantage for Pathfinder that the majority of people won't really realize:

It's ten times easier to make a Pathfinder NPC than it is a 3.5 one. In PF, everything is retroactive. Gained a point of Intelligence? You get <your level> new skill points (no more having to level up wizards one level at a time just so you can keep their skills straight!). Got a new class skill? Retroactive; you get the class skill bonus for that skill for having ranks in it even though it wasn't a class skill when you added those ranks.

Also, the skills system in general is dramatically streamlined. Several thematically similar skills got combined (Hide + Move Silently are now just Stealth; Spot, Listen, and Search are now just Perception, etc) and they did away with fraction skill ranks (from cross-class skills) and the x4 skill point bonus at level 1. Now, you can put 1 rank per level into any skill you want, and the first rank of any class skill gives you a +3 bonus to that skill (retroactively, as I mentioned above). Same net mechanical effect, but much more streamlined and incredibly easier on the DM.

Most people won't really realize this because only DMs have to deal with large numbers of characters. Players only have to deal with one at a time.

[NickAragua]

I think I may use it to introduce my 9 year old to D&D.

That actually made me remember a HUGE advantage for Pathfinder that the majority of people won't really realize:

It's ten times easier to make a Pathfinder NPC than it is a 3.5 one.

From last winter to this winter, I ran a Pathfinder campaign and I agree with this sentiment wholeheartedly. Pathfinder is definitely D&D 3.5 at its core, except they took care of some of the more annoying things. Off the top of my head (some of these are repeats of what other people have said):

- skill system overhaul.
- more feats for everyone!
- "combat manuevers" aren't as much of a pain in the ass. You just make a single role using a pre-calculated stat against the target's pre-calculated stat.
- 1st level characters are less likely to die from a stiff breeze if you use some of the optional rules.
- Every class got a major overhaul, and there's a lot of incentive to stay within one class now for the whole game.
- It's still up to the DM to ensure that everyone has fun.

www.d20pfsrd.org is an ok reference doc, though last time I used it half the links were broken, especially in the spells section.

[Peacedog]

Not to completely derail your new RPG experience, but I recently discovered Dark Dungeons which is a free D20 conversion of the original AD&D system.

Since my practical experience with paper-based D&D ended with a brief foray into the second edition rules, I was pretty happy to see this conversion. I guess if you were really into the 3.5 rules, this might just be fun to read for nostalgia purposes. But I'd never heard of the Pathfinder system so thanks for sharing.

While I'm not sure it has Thaco (I'm still skimming), it appears to have kept "confusing armor class". Which is monumentally stupid.

[Mr. Fed]

Having spent more time with Pathfinder:

1. I like the way they have spiced up the basic classes.
2. I like some of the tweaks and balances.
3. The new additional player's handbook has some new classes. They are not to my taste, although they seem to avoid the munchkinny trend of expansions.

[Isgrimnur]

I'm currently playing in two groups of Pathfinder and am enjoying it. I'm a Ranger in one, a Rogue in the other. I had played 3.5 previously, but it had been about two years before I picked up Pathfinder. It was an easy transfer, as not much had changed in the base understanding.

Min/max is still possible (don't get me started on my party member that's a 2nd level rogue/barbarian getting sneak attack with a greatsword... ), but each week, it seems like someone else is getting the hot dice and becoming the star. One week, it's the summoner, another it's the ranger of death, and another it's the fighter wading into melee. Both of my characters are still low level, so I can't speak to higher level balance issues.

Overall, I like it and the supoprt in providing adventure paths (read: modules) certainly seems to makes it easier for a non-hardcore DM to run things week to week.

[hentzau]

Overall, I like it and the supoprt in providing adventure paths (read: modules) certainly seems to makes it easier for a non-hardcore DM to run things week to week.

This is my biggest complaint about 4E. I wish that WotC had a better handle on an Adventure Path type environment. I can't spend the time to come up with something every week, so I end up combing the Dungeon adventure lists trying to find something that I like. I do know they had their own adventure path published in Dungeon, the Scales of War, but that really seemed kind of half-assed, and not very well playtested.

[Blackhawk]

I just arranged my first regular Pathfinder group, consisting of two veteran RPGers who haven't touched a game in a decade, a complete neophyte, and myself, who GMed my way through high school and college, but haven't rattled dice in more than 15 years, other than some 'lets try out the combat' practice with a friend.

I'm thinking of running a couple of one-off adventures to get everybody used to the rules (and to get myself back into the swing of GMing after so long), then working out a full campaign. I may give one of the adventure paths a shot.

It'll be interesting with so many rusty veterans wielding dice at once.

[Zurai]

I cannot recommend the Kingmaker adventure path enough. It's a semi-sandbox campaign that involves the players founding a kingdom, complete with claiming territory, building up cities, and (eventually) fighting with armies. If your players don't like one aspect or another of the kingdom rules, it's fairly easy to handwave any of it. And there's still good old fashioned D&D adventuring mixed in at every point.

If you want a more traditional adventure, Rise of the Runelords is my recommendation. It was written specifically to be very traditional in style, because it was the first AP Paizo did under their own label and they didn't want to stray far from what they new would work. It's a 3.5 adventure (not Pathfinder RPG), but it's very easy to convert on the fly.

[Blackhawk]

Since I'm starting out with new rules, players years out of practice, and a new player, I'd already decided to go with traditional at first. I'd love to try Kingmaker, but I'd prefer to get everyone on track with something more classic, especially since three of the four of us had our heyday during the 2nd edition era, and I want to draw the group into things with something they'll recognize.

I'd already decided against Kingmaker (too sandbox to start with, plus I'd rather get the core rules down before adding another set), Council of Thieves (too RP-heavy for now. I'd like it, but I'd prefer myself and the players to be more experienced first), and Serpent's Skull/Legacy of Fire (again, I'm going for a traditional setting.) Rise of the Runelords seems like it is the most likely candidate.

/edit - or maybe not. It seems like a lot of it is out of print.

/edit edit - and according to a blog post today, the rest will be unavailable very soon.

[Zurai]

I believe Paizo has said they have plans to produce an all-in-one Rise of the Runelords book at some point after they sold through their remaining stock, but I did forget about it being out of print.

You can still buy the PDFs, though. They're cheaper than the print edition and you can probably get the relevant DMing sections printed for cheaper than the difference between the print and PDF edition price.

[Arcanis]

Keep in mind Pathfinder is still based on 3.5 and didn't fix as many of the issues as they think they did. I won't take as hard a stance as some people I know, but keep in mind there will be some really broken things in there mostly with spells auto winning fights. If they haven't fixed the candle of evocation/wish tricks I would say it just doesn't exist in game.

[Blackhawk]

The last time I GMed was second edition, when house rules were king. I have no qualms about manipulating the rules, changing the rules, limiting options, or making up new rules. If there is something that will unbalance the game (wish, for instance) it simply won't be found. The GM is the world. There won't be a wish spell in that book unless I specifically choose to put it there.

As for fixes, Pathfinder may not be perfect, but it is still a step up from 3.5, and 3.5 is still a step up from 2nd. It is also the best for my needs - I've spent a lot of time looking at 4th edition, and while it doesn't look like a bad game, it isn't the kind of RPG that I'm wanting to play.

Speaking of which, my group will be getting together for a discussion and 'welcome to the rules' session in a couple of days. I'm thinking our first foray into the game after that will be a one-off with me generating the characters (I'll get some input from the players, of course.) Once they've played whatever I decide to run, they'll have enough of an understanding of the new rules that the character generation for a campaign will actually make sense to them.

[Peacedog]

As for fixes, Pathfinder may not be perfect, but it is still a step up from 3.5, and 3.5 is still a step up from 2nd.

In some ways; but combats can take a lot longer/be a lot more complicated. How much that matters to you is of course a matter of taste; maybe you want something more elaborate. 3.5e rules are very power creepy, though, and the two rulesets that improve on 3.5e (Pathfinder and IMO the even better Arcana Unearthed) also probably add to the power creep since they tend to offer more feats/spells/powers/etc to classes (in fact, one of the defining things about Pathfinder and AU are that basic classes have a lot more inherent powers. Just compare the Pathfinder fighter to the 3.5e vanilla fighter; the former gets the weapon training, armor training, and a few other tricks on top of weapon specialization).

[Peacedog]

So, we just got done with session #2 of Pathfinder, using the Legacy of Fire adventure path, which is sort of a "Hollywood Arabia" meets "D&D campaign" setting. We've got a slightly odd group, compositionwise:

1. Human Ranger, 2H weapon combat style (me).
2. Cleric of (I forget. But it's something to do with, you know, *nudge* *nudge*).
3. Cleric of (the other one I forget; I don't know the deities well).
4. Druid. A fire-affinity druid. Aiming for lots of wild shape/some summoning.
5. Wizard. Played by our most devious group member (delightful guy).
6. Bard, standard face. Played by my boss.
7. Rogue, played by the son of the Love Priestess. He's like 14 and fairly new to this stuff. Still adjusting, and occasionally prone to acts of stupidity "it's noon. Can I sneak into that large, gnoll-run town?" "You can certainly try".

So we're sort of melee light but we have superb buffing/battlefield control potential.

Unfortunately or fortunately, I think the campaign is going to revolve around me. For one, I took a background trait called "Finding Haleen" (campaign-specific). Mechanically powerful, it has interesting story potential and that's why I took it (I am a rescued slave - by her - and she has gone missing and I want to find her).

Also, as of the second adventure, I am now the "Mold Speaker". I keep waiting for an email from the DM asking me for some fortitude saves, and then to be told after failing one "you wake up as a mold person! Uh, just hand over your character sheet"). Though it's much more interesting that this:

Spoiler:

I found the weapon of a saint of a certain goodness. I found it *because* I got diseased by a slime in her run-down temple. For some reason this allowed me to find the location of the sword. Though now I have a patch of mold growing on my arm - gained when I wielded the sword - though I appear to be at peace with this.

Anyway, this appears to be a "mundane" +1 weapon but I knew, on grasping it, that it's name was "Tempest". This also happens to be the name of the patron saint Vardisha's sword. The saint of the goddess the temple is dedicated too. While we don't know this weapon is that weapon, we've been given evidence to suspect it and I have vowed to find out of it is true and carry out any purpose the sword has. My character doesn't know this but the weapon can eventually become a formidable artifact, and appears to be at the center of events to come in the campaign.

The module has pretty good CRPG potential with a slightly old-Phlanish feel. We've re-concecrated the Monastery and are now looking to re-take an old battle market nearby (now run by Gnolls), possibly permanently re-establishing it. There are a number of sites of interest in the immediate area.

[Isgrimnur]

When I played that module, three characters were trying to find Haleen. They were a halfling, a half elf, and a half orc. The jokes were non-stop.

I hope your preferred enemy is gnolls. And don't forget to collect those kill mementos.

[Ralph-Wiggum]

I played my first game of D&D since I was about eight years old last night. I had purchased the Pathfinder Beginner's Box a month or two back and finally managed to get a group together to play. I acted as the DM simply because I was the only one who had read through the books. Even for a "beginner's box", though, it took us awhile to get going; just the character creation took over two hours. We had seven (!) other players and so I modified the starter dungeon a bit to work with such a big group. We ended up having:

1) Fighter
2) Barbarian
3 & 4) Clerics (the two girls who played both wanted to be Clerics. How stereotypical).
5) Ranger (info taken from stuff I found online)
6) Wizard
7) Rogue

The campaign worked well, but really took a lot longer to complete than I expected. We started creating characters around 6:30 and didn't finish the campaign until 2:30 AM (hurray for Spring Break!). There were a couple of times I screwed up with ability checks and the like but I don't think they noticed most of the time. We were also a bit confused about some of the modifiers and skills - the beginner's rule book doesn't give much detail about how to get the skill modifiers for non pre-generated characters. And it seemed like the armor class for most of the characters was pretty high considering they were all 1st level (most had armor classes in the 15 - 16 range). Only two PCs were ever knocked unconscious the whole time. They also had trouble moving through the dungeon with such a big group.

All in all, though, it went off pretty well. Despite being dead tired by the end, I think everyone had fun. Now I just need to figure out the next time we'll be able to play and what adventure to use (i.e. a pre-made one or generate something myself).

[Peacedog]

When I played that module, three characters were trying to find Haleen. They were a halfling, a half elf, and a half orc. The jokes were non-stop.

I hope your preferred enemy is gnolls. And don't forget to collect those kill mementos.

Gnolls #1 preferred enemy (I was taken as a slave as a child, Conan Style, by a party of Gnolls and eventually sold to a party of human slavers before getting rescued. I knew this before I knew that the one Goddess was really for Gnoll killing). #2 will be some sort of outsider, since I'll probably be able to justify it thematically when it rolls around.

Actually, we encountered our first two gnolls at the end of the session. Our mage (and elf) sniped one the turn before I cut it into two pieces (the bastard. His in character response to this? "Good job getting that gnolls attention so it wouldn't flee!", as I had used run-actions on consecutive turns to move across the battlefield to get it). And I'm pretty sure I just missed killing the other (like I had it at 1 hp, and then someone finished it).

We were also a bit confused about some of the modifiers and skills - the beginner's rule book doesn't give much detail about how to get the skill modifiers for non pre-generated characters.

Well, I don't know what the beginner's box says, or what you couldn't figure out, but skills are:

Rank + Ability Modifier + 3 (class skill bonus if applicable) + anything else (talent, racial, feat, etc).

Italics indicate "where applicable". So e.g.

Half-Elven Ranger with 14 wis (+2) takes a rank in Survival and in Precision at level 1, both class skills. He uses his half-elven free skill focus ability on Survival.

Survival: 1+ 2 (wis) + 3 (class) + 3 (skill focus) = 9
Precision 1 + 2 + 3 + 2 (racial ability keen senses) = 8

He also takes, uh, something else wisdom-based that isn't a class skill (can't think of anything off hand):

1 + 2 + 0 + 0 = 3.

Of course, there are situational bonuses/penalties that can apply. The chore of tracking characters by hand is skills and these adjustments. Armor check penalties affect some skills.

I paid, well overpaid, for something called Hero Lab. It has an up-and-down interface and they gouge you when it comes to buying rule sets (you get 1 "basic" set for free with the software for $30; I paid more to get the advance players guide for Pathfinder e.g.), so I always know what's what5 because PDFs I create stick symbols next to skills that are affected by armor check penalties, and it covers all the basic adjustments for you, leaving your attention on the moment to moment stuff.

It's hard to keep track of. I've played every 3e CRPG in existence - multiple times in each case, excepting the PoR remake - and I had difficulty with it in my first pnp d20 game (Traveller T20 in fact).

And it seemed like the armor class for most of the characters was pretty high considering they were all 1st level (most had armor classes in the 15 - 16 range).

That's typical for anyone who wears medium armor, or dexy light armor users. My ranger has scale male (+5) and 14 dex (+2, and that fits the armor's max dex bonus), for an AC of 17. A Thief with 18 dex could do leather to get 16 (+2 leather, +4 dex). If a high dex character could snag a chain shirt they would be at 18.

1 HD monsters only get +1 bab at most.

Not sure how you attempted to deal with the large party size, but I think the general advice would be:

1. Increasing #s of monsters. Use cannon fodder. Flank!
2. Combat Maneuvers where appropriate.
3. Touch attacks!
4. Casters/exotic monsters/etc. Attack the weaknesses! Rangers, Fighters, and Barbarians have the will saves of a grapefruit at level 1. They will be vulnerable to certain effects as a result (but not all "will" based effects. E.g. Fighter get a bonus to fear saves, and there are a buch of traits that modify such things).

Let me tell you about the Pugwumpi. Those fuckers have a bad luck aura; you roll 2x d20 for everything relevant and take the least result. In our, oh, 7 or so round combat I hit the pugwumpi chief (who had a class level!) every round. I actually landed two blows thanks to that stupid unlock aura. And this was all with me fighting with a shattered greatsword (for the better part of two adventures). A pugwumpi shattered it (failed DC 15 will save at +0 bonus).

[Peacedog]

We're not 5 dead gnoll patrolls, a dire boar, a dead peryton, and several interrogations into probing the battle market. I fear we're running out of probe room, though. Patrols had already stepped up in regularity and frequency with the death of the pig (which, by the by, we cooked). The Peryton is going to pui the place on full alert.

We saw the shadow of a gnoll fly overhead at one point (we're based out the ruined temple of Sarinray; the hecuvah fight was a close thing and we've still got people trying to beat the disease). I can't imagine said shadow was the Peryton, so we suspect a gnoll caster who may or may not be the myseterious mouth.

But this place is going to be on high alert now. Alas, it looks like our plans to get the Peryton stuffed are going to bear no fruit.

40 minutes of today's session was spent discussing (1) the stuffing of said peryton and (2) cooking the boar.

[Zurai]

40 minutes of today's session was spent discussing (1) the stuffing of said peryton and (2) cooking the boar.

Add a bunch of sexual innuendo about "stuffing" and you've got one of our sessions!

[Blackhawk]

I played my first game of D&D since I was about eight years old last night. I had purchased the Pathfinder Beginner's Box a month or two back and finally managed to get a group together to play.

The Beginner's Box is great. I picked one up for my kids a few weeks ago. We've since played through two short adventures, and they love it. I'll be running a regular campaign for them going forward.

The beginner's box is a pared down version of the core rulebook. You get three races (human, elf, dwarf), and four classes (fighter, wizard, rogue, cleric), all up to level 5. The equipment list, spell list, skill list and feats lists are significantly shortened, plus it includes short versions of the bestiary and magic items lists. The rules include all of the basics, but remove the flat footed rules, attacks of opportunity, all combat maneuvers, and explains the remaining rules in a much plainer, less wordy style. Not only that, but you get a flip mat (dry erase ready two sided map), a full set of dice, four pre-generated characters, plus 80 cardboard minis - and I got it all for only $23 on Amazon. It's perfect for introducing someone to RPGs (aka it is a 'gateway drug'.)

It is simple enough that my kids (8 and 10) were able to play with no problem. I'll be slowly transitioning them to the full rules over the next few months, one piece at a time.

If you're using it, be sure to check Paizo's site, as they are giving away free supplements to the two books that come with it, including new gear, beasties, a new class (barbarian), and a new adventure, all for free. Also check out this fellow's site. He has converted all of the core plus APG plus Ultimate book classes to the beginner's box format, along with all of the core races and a variety of monsters.

----------------

As for the full game I was talking about before, the fellow who was organizing the whole thing moved away right after I posted about it, and the whole thing fell apart.

A month or so ago, though, I landed myself in the middle of a new six person group that is just starting to form. All adults, and all experienced PnP gamers (although with varying levels of Pathfinder experience.) Our first get-together is less than a week from now. We'll be sitting down for a boardgame and bull session to get to know each other a little bit and come up with a plan going forward.

To begin with, it looks like there will be three of us (myself included) taking turns GMing, switching out every session or two. All three of us are used to getting stuck being the only GM, so we're all desperate to have a chance to actually play. We're using the idea behind Pathfinder Society Organized Play as the framework for the campaign, except without the reporting and restrictions. We'll all have characters from the Pathfinder Lodge and will be running a variety of short missions for an NPC Venture Captain. It will allow us to rotate GMs and party members and still have a degree of coherency. At some point, someone will likely decide they want to run a full campaign, but for now this will give us a chance to learn the rules and each others' style.

I'm excited. It'll be the first full sized regular RPG group I'll have had since college.

[Peacedog]

Also, last session convinced me to stop worrying about initiative. Not that it won't be a problem in the future - higher level spell casters are certainly going to complicate things. But it's a marked change from T20, where initiative is probably the single most important aspect of combat.

[Zurai]

Yeah, in standard "roll once for the entire combat" D&D/Pathfinder initiative, it's not really critical to have a high initiative modifier until you're pretty high level and enemies have the potential to wipe out or cripple a significant portion of your party on their first action.

We play with "roll once each round", at least for smaller combats, and it makes having a higher modifier a little more useful because the increased number of rolls means there's actually less randomness to the initiative order, overall.

[Peacedog]

So, we finished chapter 1 last week. It was hectic. We've been short handed the last few sessions. First up was the fight with Kardswann, whom my character suddenly felt he recognized, due to the Mold Speaker/Tempest connection. Unfortunately, Kard made most of his will saves and spent a good portion of the combat carving people to into ribbons. We all lived through it, but it was a close thing, and I was 2 hp from death at one point (-13). I rolled appalingly for the first time in the campaign.

Overall, we had a lot of help. Haleen took out the ogre. The 3 Jaws Gnolls attacked from the north and drew quite a bit of attention away from the battle market. And the Harpy convinced various humans to sit this out (how we got the harpy on our side is another matter entirely).

Next up we got asked to deal with the basement of Sarinrae's temple. We had a death unfortunately (and while the DM is generous, this was like 20 hp past the character's limit): the elf mage was the only one to resist both the dazzle effect and color spray (actually, he wasn't in the color spray aoe). Being the only active person, he was toast. We nearly lost someone else, and the DM had to rule that various missing people popped in to heal (I required a ton of healing during the fight) or throw up a summons. I still feel like the DM pulled punches, possibly more than he wanted to. We probably should have wiped.

What made that final encounter worse was we were buffed and reayd for something ungly but everything ran out before we got there. The bless weapon I received didn't much matter but the protections from evil everyone had, and the str/con buffs I had, did. They didn't help my rolling; the zombie encounter in the hallway went longer than it should have.

I may be wrong on the DM pulling punches, but it seemed like it. It was fun but I wish we had either had more people or just listened to me - Ididn't want to continue with our buffs down (though it wasn't clear if we could properly re-seal the place).

We're going to do the optional "city building" stuff and some sidequests before progressing onto chapter 2.

[Isgrimnur]

If anyone is looking for the manual, I'd be willing to sell. And I have the Legacy of Fire guide.

[Peacedog]

Today we got to the city building portion of Legacy of Fire. Post chapter 1, if you will. Tremendously fun and interesting, though I contracted lycranthropy due to a particular random event that hit. We did 6 months worth of city stuff, and we're in a fairly solid place now with 4 claimed hexes (Monastary, Shrine of Nethesis or whoever, A road/Water hex SE of the monstary, and the Pesh Fields). We've build 2 housings, the Inn, the Stables, a Dump, the Alchemist lab, and I can't remember. I nutted a couple of rolls for the minor magic items and we wound up selling a couple of pricey wounderous items to boost our build points. The economic rolls all went great until the last one (which we wound up generating no BP on), but we made up for it with a food boom. Right now we're size 5 with 2 farms. We're probably going to claim an area with ruins, a waterfall, and a road to the north next and do another farm there.

It's a pretty solid set of mechanics for doing this sort of thing.

[Zurai]

Those rules aren't from Legacy of Fire, for the record. Sounds like your GM is mixing in the Kingmaker kingdom rules.

[Peacedog]

We just started chapter 4 (of 6) of Legacy of Fire. Ranger favored terrain finally paid off (Desert was the first, just in time to spend very little time in the desert). I took and buffed Jungle at level 8 and that meant that it was impossible for me not to easily track the objective at the start of the chapter (I think I was at +21 track before getting 3 aids per attempt).

Pathfinder Society play has made me less shameful of blantant power gaming (which we're ignoring via gentleman's agreement and also by excluding some stuff from the APG and most stuff beyond that), I will say that much. Some of the scenarios are insanely fucking hard.