[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.26491125 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Hey guys, Me and my friends are planning to get into an RPG and because we're all beginners I have come here just to ask advice on which one we should get into. My suggestion was Pathfinder as the beginner box looks like a good set-up, but obviously your advice is welcome.

>> No.26491173

Here Anon.
It's neither official guide, nor comprehensive list of suggestions, merely a simple help for newcomers.

I hope it'll help you a bit.

>> No.26491191

thanks anon, we'll check it out.

>> No.26491220


OP I'd actually suggest avoiding Pathfinder.

Just cause you're probably gonna wind up playing with people who actually know how to use a Wizard EVENTUALLY and it might disillusion you about the game.

>> No.26491233

No problem.
Remember OP, it's just a suggestion. Read it, come back with more precise questions, and /tg/ will try to provide better answers.

>> No.26491244

Ok, so at the moment, D&D is the front runner then, and would you recommend the beginner box?

>> No.26491270


wow holy shit this image is biased.

>> No.26491282

>I wanna play RPGs
>advertisement for needlessly complex d20 system

Whatever I guess. It's the easiest to find players for nowadays anyways.

Fucking 3eaboos ruined the hobby.

>> No.26491283

Here you go.

Trip/namefag should be aware that there's no need to multiply threads.

>> No.26491292


Mehh probably? AD&D is workable but wonky and you gotta deal with rolling low for defense but high for basically everything else.

4e's red box is probably your best bet.

>> No.26491295

What's sad is you're completely wrong for the wrong reasons.

>> No.26491303

>4e is focused on fighting

Oh for fucks sake.

>> No.26491338



>> No.26491351

So... why don't you guise recommend easy games to newbs?

>> No.26491354

I believe this is clearly stated in #1, right?

What can i say... I believe people should -> START <- with things that have best support (both official and unofficial). It's not that their choice is for life.

>> No.26491361


Two replies. Two replies in a "Hey guys, I'm intrested in Pathfinder, how about it?" thread before HUR DUR CASTER EDITION BULLSHIT.

No. Just no. Cut off your own head.

>> No.26491365

Guys, all I want to do is start playing an RPG with my friends (where all new), where do I start, some people are saying pathfinder is bad and others are saying D&D, I think as D&D is most probably the most heard of we might go there, and get the 4th edition red box someone suggested.

>> No.26491392

Because the beginner boxes for 4e and PF are easy. And realistically, there is no such thing as a non-daunting RPG with the name - even FATE has a huge book.

>> No.26491401

It's true Anon. Since 1st ed, DnD and its derivatives were more combat than storytelling oriented. Of course it depends heavily on the DM and his group, but still...

>> No.26491408


>Hey guys I'm interested in this system!
>Yea this system is kinda broken? It's got real problems in the-


>> No.26491411


Just...just no 4e, please. Promise me that much OP. In time, you shall come to understand.

>> No.26491417

Get FATE Core. Please, trust me.

D&D is not a good system. It has a well-known name and that's it. FATE will save you a lot of headache.

>> No.26491418

Yeah, OP. Just go with Pathfinder. Not a perfect game, but plenty of support and a lot of stuff you can do. If you like it and you find you like roleplaying, you can worry about OPTIMAL BEST ULTRABALANCED SYSTEM OF GREATNESS later. Just go with this, and have fun. Many, many people have despite bitching and moaning on the contrary.

>> No.26491432


No 4e, look into Pathfinder if you want to play D&D. 4e is a sham of a game.

>> No.26491434

>Get FATE Core. Please, trust me.
But Anon, gentlemen don't play FATE. We only suggest it as magical cure for all ailments. Actual playing? Come on...

>> No.26491436


You're starting to get into an edition war I'm afraid and people aren't gonna say _____ and other are gonna say ______ and there's gonna be misinformed opinions everywhere.

Look you want my honest answer? Buy Dungeon World. I know that's not PF or D&D but it's probably the better new guy game.

>> No.26491439

Play the 4e red box, the pathfinder beginner box, or Dungeon World (which is free online).

>> No.26491446


>> No.26491447

Fuck this guy, get the 4e Red Box.

>> No.26491455

Full casters in PF aren't the gods people like to portray them ass. A bard, magus, summoner, or inquisitor played right makes full casters and full melee classes look pretty pathetic because the full casters can't into skill checks or anything that isn't "screw over the enemy temporarily while being useless for killing them", and the full melee aren't even useful for anything other than killing things. The 3/4 BAB classes overwhelm full casters and melee classes by a long shot, and they're too complex for the new player to get an immediate handle on.

>> No.26491458


Get a boxed set of whatever

>> No.26491461

Pathfinder is just a modified version of an older edition of d&d.

Sorry you have to sit through this. There is intense animosity between 4th edition D&D players and 3rd edition D&D/Pathfinder players.

Pathfinder is good to pick up because it has a lot of support and you will never have trouble finding players. 4e D&D isn't bad either, despite what people will tell you. They don't know shit. People will tell you that both systems have flaws, but to be 100% honest you don't REALLY need to worry about them. I'm playing Pathfinder with a group of new players right now and they all love it.

FATE is also decent for pulpy adventures, but your players will have to be proactive for it to really shine. I personally like it the best of all 3, but it's not for everybody.

>> No.26491474

>Full casters in PF
> Once an anchor is set, other judgments are made by adjusting away from that anchor, and there is a bias toward interpreting other information around the anchor. For example, the initial price offered for a used car sets the standard for the rest of the negotiations, so that prices lower than the initial price seem more reasonable even if they are still higher than what the car is really worth.

>> No.26491480


I'm in two FATE games right now. You were saying?

>> No.26491482


Don't listen to these people OP. They just wanna perpetuate their broken shitty game with a dumb ass setting and shit over all games they feel as inferior.

4e is fine. Literally all "arguments" against 4e are a repetition of buzzwords.

And I'm not even a hardcore 4rry. I think it's flawed! I think there are plenty of problems with it. It's just nobody talks about those flaws cause they'd rather call it WoW edition.

>> No.26491489


FATE isn't a real game. It's just something everyone throws around as the greatest thing ever. It doesn't really work all that well as a thing you actually play. Also, it's really, REALLY not something you want to give to beginners. As simple as it might seem, it requires a lot of experience.

>> No.26491490


FATE is free online!

>> No.26491497

That's the problem with d20fags (Pathfinder, D&D), they just can't stop biting each other.

>> No.26491499

Ok, 4th edition D&D or Pathfinder.

>> No.26491501



Welcome to /tg/

>> No.26491504

>I'm in two FATE games right now. You were saying?
That i'm in two girls right now. Can't hear you over their tits. You were saying?

>> No.26491507

>isn't a real game

What the fuck is that supposed to mean?

>> No.26491509

Welcome to 4chan you mean.

>> No.26491513

Fuckin fanboyisms

>> No.26491521


I believe pathfinder box has more content, being up to 5 levels while red box lasts for 3

>> No.26491524

Oh /tg/, you're so gullible...

>> No.26491528


Get Pathfinder starter box.

4e is nothing more than a disappointment.

>> No.26491532

play Dungeon World.

>> No.26491534


First, stop shouting. Secondly, go with your original idea and get the Pathfinder beginner box. Unless something else in the store looks nicer. Just go. Internet is full of opinions and you'll never get a straight answer here.

>> No.26491538

>What can i say... I believe people should -> START <- with things that have best support (both official and unofficial).
So both GURPS and Savage Worlds? Sounds about right to me.

Also I think you posted it once, and it doesn't look like you changed it. Go back to that thread on foolz, read through again, change it and rename it (for example into "I wanna play D&D")

>> No.26491541

...and install Gentoo.

>> No.26491552

If it's up to me? I'd say Pathfinder. I'm not even a detractor of 4e.

Pathfinder will just be incredibly easy to find players for. It's the most popular RPG on the market right now.

It's really a dangerous question to ask here though.

>> No.26491556


That it doesn't actually hold up at all when you try to play it and doesn't function nearly as well as a game than it does as a pretty thing to look at.

>> No.26491560

ignore anyone who is telling you that something is worse than another.

I will tell you however, than Dungeon World is easy to learn and play, and does not require anything more than pencil, paper and dice.

>> No.26491570


Pathfinder, far superior game.

>> No.26491577


>GURPS and Savage Worlds

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. I am amused by your hallucinations.

>> No.26491583


Pathfinder feels more like other rpgs, so I'd start there.

>> No.26491589

It really isn't but I'll recommend it anyways.

I have the feeling everybody complaining about 4e is either the same person or a summer visitor.

>> No.26491604

no, shut up, these are not true, and neither is the opposite.

>> No.26491609

You could download the keep on shadowfell quick start rules for dnd 4ed. Its essentially a free variant of the red box, pick up the two heroes essential books as well and you will have enough to run a few games.

>> No.26491617

Anon, i never promised that i'll accept each and every suggestion, especially if it contradicts my own experience and observation.

>> No.26491618

More like what other RPGs exactly?
If we're talking about d&d 4e is much closer.

>> No.26491619

Listen here, get the whole D&D and PF right out of your mind. Why? Well, just check out how much bullshit it already started in this thread.

Now, you wanna check out a few things. First, google GURPS lite and Savage Worlds test drive. Both are great and solid systems, with big support to them and you can do anything you want with them (ANYTHING).
Then you might also want to check out Mini 6 (it's incredibly simple), the one page rpgs on the 1d4wiki and maybe Fiasco (if you want to know what the roleplaying in rpg means).

I guarante you, that you will not be disappointed, otherwise I will start a catgirl, brown elf or muscle girl thread as recompensation.

>> No.26491632

ok then, what price range are we looking at for D&D 4e compared with pathfinder

>> No.26491656

I dunno, but the big pile of splats for both systems count as support, I guess

Then at least rename it, because it only kicks up shitstorms, as you can see

>> No.26491661


Our campaign is six sessions in. The only tweak we needed was to add Magic as a skill. It works beautifully.

A bar fight last session was probably the most fluid encounter I've ever had in a game.

I can't wait for the Eclipse Phase book.

What experience did you have?

>> No.26491669

Here's a secret. You can pirate all the books for free, and you don't really need minis to play the game. You can do it all for free unless your friends insist on a physical book

>> No.26491689

You can get a free digital version of the 4ed starter, pick up an essentials player options book or two. That will total out to about £20 for two books

>> No.26491694

Rename it? To what?

>> No.26491709


Your big pile of splats has nothing on Pathfinder's big pile of splats and a really, really large playerbase complemented by active creator support and participation on discussion. And global Society Play. And a lot of internet services. And all that.

>> No.26491712

Read >>26491417, >>26491490, >>26491532, >>26491619
For your own good, don't start with PF or D&D, otherwise you will poision your own well (that is your friends) with that shitty system

>> No.26491719

I think we'd rather have something physical

Is this a good thing guys, It's extremely cheap compared to the Pathfinder beginner set.

>> No.26491742


D&D is not a good system. Each edition is unintuitive, and nit newbie-friendly at all.

Get the name out of your head, and look into something else. Savage Worlds, FATE, Dungeon World... anything else.

>> No.26491744

>Begginners paying for RPG games that you might not even like.
I made that mistake once. OP should import pirate them first, if the group likes and gets serious then you should buy them.

Or you can repeat my mistake and have three hugeass tomes collecting dust in your closet.

>> No.26491764

> Implying people can't say the difference between fun and no-fun.
Anon, Anon, Anon... If you lack faith in newcomers intelligence, why do you bother to answer their pleas?

>> No.26491765

>pathfinders splats
>compared to the system that gets made fun of for needing a separate room to put all the books in

your fucking with me, right?

>> No.26491768

I would say that DnD 3.5 or Pathfinder would be best. They aren't the best systems but it is a good start up game to get into other systems.

>> No.26491773

Pick up this as well

or heroes of the fallen realms, or both!

>> No.26491778

As I pointed out "I wanna play D&D!" would be a good start. You'll still get smacktalked by the D&D haters, but at least not by the guys who want to offer newbies a real choice,

>> No.26491808


What the fuck is wrong with Unknown Armies? It's exponentially easier for newbies to pick up than Pathfinder.

I'll fucking fight you.

>> No.26491827


Are you telling someone that 3.5 is good? With a straight face?

>> No.26491829

Ignore this image, it is woefully biased.
Pathfinders is a terrible system and is especially bad for beginners.

I recommend Dungeon World as well.

>> No.26491831

Ooooor you could go to your local game shop, and, if it participated in the free rpg day, grab a free copy of the intro rules for Shadowrun, Savage Worlds and a few other systems.
Seriously, don't spend money right away. Try out a few rpgs through pdfs or the free samples you can get at your game shop

>> No.26491846


Free shit is great.

It's how I got into Mouse Guard.

>> No.26491849

Dungeon World might be cool, Op, though I don't know how complicated the rules are.

My first RPG was a BRP (Basic Roleplaying System)-based fantasy (Drakar & Demoner, it's Swedish) - I think the more commonly known one there is RuneQuest.

I usually like systems which are intuitive - BRP has some popularity because it's pretty simple - you have percentage values for your skills, you need to roll under to succeed. Some stuff will lower your chance to succeed. Easy to grasp and easy to mod.

On the other hand, World of Darkness/WW systems have been lauded as pretty intuitive to new players - making new characters are a snap and you get a decent idea about how good they are at things.

If you want D&D for dungeoneering, I'd suggest you go with older editions (pre 3E) of Dungeons & Dragons or Old School Renaissance (OSR) stuff - to cut down on the complicated crap for combat. Combat is still big in all editions of D&D, but 3.X has some flaws and 4E has combat as a big focus - ergo a crapload of rules for combat - and 3.X/4E/PF all more or less require you to get a bunch of stuff to keep track on where people are for combat. For Old School (fewer rules, more awesome) I hear Labyrinth Lord is pretty awesome, same with Lamentations of the Flame Princess, but there are other fine games which I've forgot to mention.

*Basic Roleplaying System. Call of Cthulhu (most editions) uses it.

>> No.26491851

D&D is considered the standard but there really are better games out there for beginners.

>> No.26491857

The setting and tone might be hard for new DMs to do well.

>> No.26491870

Pathfinder or DnD 4e.
Both have beginners' sets that makes starting up easy.
Both have a large community.
Both are fun to play.

Personally I play Pathfinder so I'd recommend that, but seriously, either one is fine.
If one is cheaper than the other, then that should tip the scales for you.

>> No.26491881


Neither are good systems. Both require memorization of a fuck-ton of unintuitive rules. Getting newbies into these games often chases them out of the market because they are nit beginner-friendly games.

>> No.26491888

Dungeon World.
Simple, easy, short book.

>> No.26491902

Whoa, this nigger gets it and is pretty good with his words

>> No.26491904

Anon, i think i expressed it clearly that it's subjective suggestion. I provided arguments i find substantial, there's also whole part dedicated to alternatives and such.

Hate i get comes mostly from the fact, that people arguing over it are usually veterans too advanced to recall how it is to learn ABC of hobby. This image is not for them.

- Lack of strong support, both official and unofficial
- Lack of good scenarios and campaigns
- More or less "esoteric" system, and they usually don't appeal to the majority of players

> I'll fucking fight you.
I am very sure you wouldn't survive an attempt Anon. Then again, miracles DO happen, no question about it.

EVERY opinion is biased Anon. And i don't try to hide that. Actually it's stated clearly, right there at the beginning of this "guide".

>> No.26491906


I don't know if I'd call older editions less complex. Granted, I fucking love 2e, but there's so many systems that follow no grand logic (Roll over, roll under, add scores, minus scores, compare numbers, flat numbers) and obviously could use a lot of unification and streamlining. It goes fast when you know it, but only when you do. Much of the stuff looks simple on paper, but when there's so much stuff to remember...

>> No.26491909

Being well supported doesn't mean it's good. PF is well supported because it's riding the coat tails of another game that itself wasn't good.

There are better games to introduce new people to the hobby with.

>> No.26491915

Ok guys me and my friends are pretty sure that we're most probably going to get the d&d 4e red box to start because it's a good price and has some good shit to start with.

>> No.26491947



Please now. This will only end in someome playing Raggi's THIS IS MY FETISH game and getting traumatised over horrible rotting beasts from some horrible torture dungeon fucking his corpse to death.

>> No.26491948


OP, look at me.

Do not play D&D, or a D&D derivative like Pathfinder.

Dungeon World, Old-School Hack, and FATE are all availible for free online, and will give you everything you want out of D&D, but in a much easier to grasp format.

>> No.26491951

Pathfinder is a shined up version of D&D 3.5. If you are going to play D&D 3.5 you may as well play PF. It's still a turd but at least it's a shiny one.

Look into the other games recommended in this thread.

>> No.26491964

Yeah, you trolled us good

>> No.26491966


Good. Now go and don't look back. GO! Go and leave this bickering shitpile.

>> No.26492019

>Being well supported doesn't mean it's good.
It means that you aren't alone.
- Can't understand some rule? There are people who are eager to explain it, or provide homebrewed alternative.
- "How, when, and where?" Plenty of material all around, like ITT:
- No idea for scenarios? People just waiting to share their experience.
- Want to play? High possibility to find people knowing such system and willing to play it - no matter how inexperienced you are.

It's not BEST, easiest, ultimate system, and it is stated in that "guide". Still, it's a "safe bet", and that's why i'm suggesting this, over other systems i know.

>> No.26492040

Out of interest are there any level 1-10 modules for 4ed that are sold as an official product? I usually see pathfinder campaign modules advertised but never 4ed modules.

>> No.26492044

A) Welcome to the internet/4chab/tg/nerds/etc
B) Dungeon World.
Fuck it I'll just give you the free version.

>> No.26492048

True. I think my inexperience with D&D overall is showing - I have like a decent grasp of 3.X and 4E (I hope) or at least as much as I can get without, you know, actually playing the games for a few campaigns, but I'm not perfectly sure about how well the old systems worked.

I, uh... I usually end up being the GM. So on the plus side, I can run whatever the heck I want.

>> No.26492062

If you're planning on playing with people who already know a system (the easiest way to learn), then you pretty much have to go with what's available, and games like Pathfinder and 4e D&D are going to be very prominent. With that said, neither of these is a very good game for beginners (4e is better if you have a choice), and you should avoid them if you are learning on your own to play with others who have never played before. Check out Old School Hack for a very minimalist, somewhat game-y dungeon crawler. Go for Swords and Wizardry Whitebox if you want a more authentic, but still simple, D&D experience (it's a clone of original D&D). Both of those are available for free, just google them. Castles & Crusades is a bit more sophisticated, while still being dirt simple compared to Pathfinder / 3.5 / 4e. And finally, if you're not specifically attached to the idea of playing D&D, you might want to check out something like Savage Worlds (test drive pdf attached).

>> No.26492067

Come to think about it, i don't remember ANY DnD module (except of, heh, ToH) being discussed lately.

>> No.26492080

best game settings coming from a guy who likes polar bears in breastplates.

>> No.26492108

If you insist on those two then I would say 4e. It's just a better game. PF is still carrying around the baggage and terrible design of the edition that it's based on such as mountains of trap options.

>> No.26492124

Anon, if you have a full party of players willing to run just anything, then i envy you. Still, it's not what we - the majority of RPG world - can count on.

>> No.26492129

Shows up as a dead image on my computer, but opens up fine as a pdf. In any case, it's freely available if you want to google it.

>> No.26492131

I just want to be able to slap a pre done campaign down for new players, why do publishes hate me so?

>> No.26492134


>> No.26492142

>> No.26492158

Well that goes without saying.

>> No.26492162


I do not know this setting. But I'd like to. Enlighten me, anon.

>> No.26492165

Who gives a shit. There's been edition wars threads posted with the least subtle bait imaginable on /tg/ that still garnered 600+ replies.

>> No.26492169

I think that's because Pathfinder guys still believe in their product, while Wizards abandon it in favor of upcoming 5th edition.

>> No.26492185

And we had edition wars regardless if the OP is trolling or not.

On the grimdarkness of /tg/, there is only edition wars.

>> No.26492198


Nobody likes 5th edition and everyone is crying about it.

>> No.26492204

Mhmm how hard would it be to convert a pathfinder campaign module to 4th ed?

>> No.26492205

>Still, it's not what we - the majority of RPG world - can count on.
What? It's the same for me

>> No.26492209

I'm not trolling guys, I just didn't realize you guys get this mad at each other.

>> No.26492210

There was a time when we liked it, but since then it's been like watching a car crash in slow motion

>> No.26492217

OP, every time these threads come up, beginners will inevitably ask which D&D they should play.

What I like to ask is whether or not you want to play D&D because you want to play D&D, or whether you want to play an RPG but all you know if is D&D.

There's no shame in only knowing the biggest damn RPG to ever exist. It's popular as hell for a reason and countless people play it for many more reasons. However, it is not your only option, and what you and your group may want can vary drastically from what you can actually do with a D&D type game.

What I'd suggest doing is downloading and skimming through a few different systems. Find the one that you think you'd enjoy the most. The one that confuses you the least. If that's D&D, then whatever, play D&D, but there's TONS of games out there and you might find that you don't have to be chained to the d20 like so many other players have before you.

>> No.26492233

I don't give a shit. I value me some good flamewar over editions.

It only makes me a little sad to see people still believing that their advertising means anything for anyone.

>> No.26492244

You can get classic games for free, such as:

Basic fantasy roleplaying (http://www.basicfantasy.org/downloads.html)

Swords and Wizardry

Both feature basically the same stuff as Pathfinder/3.5 with much less hassle and for no money.

>> No.26492253

"Majority" Anon. "Majority".

>> No.26492262

I can't wait until 5ed drops, those upcoming 4 way edition wars will be grand

>> No.26492267

>Dungeon World might be cool, Op, though I don't know how complicated the rules are.
They're not, at all.
It's a massively more simple than any d20 or WoD based game.

>> No.26492295

>Actually it's stated clearly, right there at the beginning of this "guide".
Tellin people you're full of shit doesn't mean you're not still full of shit.

>> No.26492297

Don't sweat it. Fanboy-ism mixed with bad blood from previous fights about this sort of thing mean that issue has become like trying to rationally discuss American politics. Of course, like American politics, there are good answers and bad answers (or at least answers that are far worse than others)... I'm not gonna say which is which, because the last thing we need is a political war on top of everything else, but it's the same kind of thing.

>> No.26492308

pretty much just a matter of turning the monsters in the encounters into 4e versions, maybe tossing in or taking out a few baddies to make sure the combat is balanced and fun

>> No.26492313

And for a good reason i guess.

I won't lie: i'm eager to see next incarnation of edition wars.

>> No.26492328

Pathfinder and 4th Edition are both fine versions of D&D. I personally prefer 4th because system mastery is less of a factor (i.e., you don't have to know the entire ruleset back-to-front in order to create a decent character) and there are fewer trap options in character development (options that are dramatically worse than others but only obviously so if you've played a shit-ton). The main downside of 4th edition is that the rules are somewhat focused on tactical, grid-based combat; this doesn't mean that you can't do other stuff with the system (the skill system is actual quite well done, IMHO) but a decent chunk of the rules are geared for tactical combat.

So yeah. Just my two cents.

>> No.26492332

Dungeon World has all of that just on it's G+ community and still has vastly better and more intuitive and newbie friendly rules.

>> No.26492347


Man, 4 ways doesn't even begin to describe the holocaust of the Last Shitstorms. They'll be something other entirely. Completely new, obscure fronts will arise. All will lose meaning and ultimately it will become a war of each man against everyone else. It will be the endtimes. The fucking Ragnarök. There'll be so much shit that the world will drown.

>> No.26492351

>What I like to ask is whether or not you want to play D&D because you want to play D&D, or whether you want to play an RPG but all you know if is D&D.
This. D&D has brand recognition, but that doesn't really indicate quality or make it appropriate for beginners. Granted, popularity can make it possible to find players already familiar with a game, and that's a factor worth considering, but otherwise, there really are much better games out there for noobs.

>> No.26492356

Oh great! I was worried it would be a massive clusterfuck. I don't suppose you have any suggestions for a 1-10ish module which would be suitable?

It will be grand, truly the asses of many a fa/tg/uy will become flustered and pained.

>> No.26492362


You do realize that that means absolutely nothing, right? Every fucking game in the world has "better and more intuitive rules". It's a fucking buzzword by now.

>> No.26492363

I believe in partnership and treating people like i'd like to be treated myself: with a honesty. I always picture newcomers as intelligent people, who are able to determine what it means "fun" for them, and what not.

Therefore: yes. subjective suggestions based on personal experience.

Can you say the same for yourself?

>> No.26492383

I dunno man, a majority of the people I know who play RPGs started out with a group of friends and picked something which tickled their fancy. I'd love statistics of it either way, but popularity mostly seemed to account for what games they picked, rather than were forced to pick. If you're scoping the genre, you can obviously make a more well-informed choice.

Granted, we didn't exactly have the most original and/or awesome of plots back in those days, but it was fun - which can be had with most systems. Less reading/prep time gets more fun and stops GM burnout, so I'm like - "pick a simple system, it helps". Though D&D is fine too, if you really want to run it.

>> No.26492384

I dunno, but, it's been like that for most guys I've played with and met

>> No.26492389

I actually don't know shit about Pathfinder

>> No.26492401

It's /tg/. I judge based on what WE discuss here, and which system is more endorsed. You can hold it against me, but then again - it's someones choice to come here - to 4chan and ask us instead of some other community.

>> No.26492409

Aww shucks, thanks for the prior help then kind anon!

>> No.26492431

Are you fucking kidding me?
Most everything in Pathfinder is either on the spell-list, or "Roll a d20, add your skill modifier that's written on your character sheet, and see if it's higher than the difficulty".

That's not very hard.
There are separate rules for each class, sure, but a paladin need not donate a single fuck to the Charity of Understanding the Rogue Class.

Character creation takes time, sure, but then again, it's a thing you're going to do that's going to be with you throughout the fucking game.

It's not something you should take lightly.

>> No.26492436

There are a few 4E modules.

I have no idea how good they are. Campaign modules as a rule are pretty bad, though. Something about them not being properly written for the format. I remember a campaign which had a full floor map of a single castle and like 50 pages of detailed descriptions of most every single room. We navigated that castle (and offed its BBEG, kind of by accidentally running into him) in 2 hours.

It's funny, because writing your own adventures is much easier and they almost always work better when you've got some experience under your belt.

>> No.26492445

Everything is relative, but Pathfinder is definitely towards the more complex end of RPGs. Like upper quartile at the very least.

>> No.26492460

You don't really have to do that in Pathfinder either.

But Pathfinder and 3.5 both DO place a lot of importance on you sitting down and thinking through your character.

If you don't like character creation, then 3.5/PF even if magically rebalanced and super duper in every other regard would not be fun for you to play.

>> No.26492468

The depth of options, monsters, features, abilities, feats, and just the shear amount of CONTENT Pathfinder presents tends to create choice paralysis, or cause new players to pick the wrong things that tend to inhibit their ability to enjoy the game, because they thought they were building a good character and the GM thought he'd picked out a good monster, and instead, everyone is dead and no one is happy.

>> No.26492471

Except that the beginners' box has a simplified ruleset, and the very basics of d20 systems are still very simple to use.

>> No.26492486

Calculate Combat Manoeuvre Bonus for me and then use it to go through a simple grapple check.

>> No.26492487

I think you're overstating your case.
then again, my first 3.5 character was a cleric, because I liked them in 2e.
I had my hand held pretty well by that.

> What is this, divine power?

>> No.26492493

Don't know if OP is still around, but here's what I think.
Since you're completely new, don't bother with 4th edition yet. That's not because Pathfinder is better, both are pretty good games, with 4th being a far more balanced one, but for the following reasons:
- 4th edition's official adventures are very bad compared to pathfinder's. This might not be bothersome for experienced DM's who can make their own adventures easily, but for new ones it's a very big deal.
- Everything you need about pathfinder is available for free in this site http://www.d20pfsrd.com/ , while in order to play 4th you need to spend money on the books, which leads us to the next point
- Wizard's will be soon releasing the 5th of D&D, which makes investing money in 4th a very risky thing for new players.

>> No.26492494

OCR grognards, 2E purists, 3aboos, 4rries, Empty Nexters and Filthy Story Gamers.

All Were gathered under the burning skies at the beginning of the Last Great Edition War.

The hate and tension was palpable; the neckbears seethed restlessly in their pens.

In the silence that comes before the storm it was heard. The word that split the earth and drove the assembled hordes of nerds and basement dwellers into their terrible Shit Storm which rages now still and shall until the end of days.

The word that ended all productivity and civility; Fun

>> No.26492511

Just because it is said often doesn't mean it isn't true.
Maybe so many games are said to have better rules than 3.x because, shock of shocks, their are few games that could possibly have worse.

>> No.26492515

Okay, I read the CMB number you've put on your character sheet.

> Do you have improved grapple?
If so, add 2 to CMB.
Otherwise, the other guy swings at you.

Now roll a d20, and add your CMB.
Is it over the other guys' CMD?

Congrats, he's now grappled.

>> No.26492520

Thanks a lot for the reasonable advice, I'll discuss it with my friends and I think we'll all chip in for a PF set, main reason for before was that PF was considerably more expensive but I do prefer what is in the box for PF.

>> No.26492533

I do indeed.
All of my suggestions are subjective and based on my experiences.
The difference is that I do not recommend that new players/groups play games based on system mastery/ivory tower design and that are full of trap options specifically designed to fuck with new players.

>> No.26492551


Using more buzzwords won't actually make you right, you know.

>> No.26492559

Yes. Rolling a d20 and adding is rather simple.

Then you add the clusterfucks that are the spell lists, the kind of nonsensical skill system, conditions and combat maneuvres.

You can learn the system, but it is not by any measurement a simple, intuitive system. Arguing that it should take a long time to make a new character adds to the weight of this point.

>> No.26492620

Hey, did that guy hit you with the AOO? Then you have to subtract the damage from your grapple roll.

Also, if you really succeeded at grappling, you forgot to add that you and the target now have the grappled condition. I hope you know what that entails

>> No.26492634

Anons, it's not that i have anything against you, or that i disregard your experience. I'm simply listening to countless stories how things are, and that's what "majority" is for me.

>> No.26492663

>Risky old editions

I know you're coming from the angle "and suddenly noone will play your old game with you", but I should point out that my old 3E GURPS Horror book has not yet erupted into ghostflame, nor have ninjas destroyed my Exalted 1st Edition books. Also 3.X/PF still has players, while I assume the D&D 4E sales had to have come from somewhere, so you should be able to find a group somewhere. There's also the (very real) risk of 5E imploding because of Hasbro being Hasbro, so take that risk business with a grain of salt.

>> No.26492681

>options specifically designed to fuck with new players.

>> No.26492702

>Using actual Grapple rules and not just making it an opposed Str roll
>Laughing homebrew neckbears

>> No.26492709

>and the very basics of d20 systems are still very simple to use
That's part of the problem.
The d20 system LOOKS incredibly simple on the surface. Get a little beneath that surface though and you find complex manuever rules, loads of Attacks of Opportunity, spells that shatter the game and MOUNTAINS of trap options ranging from feats to skills to entire fucking classes.

This is extra bad for new players because it convinces them that all other games take as much study and system mastery to "play right" thus leading to the oft muttered "I don't have time" reasoning when people are confronted with systems that would better suit them/their play style.

>> No.26492724

If you're admitting that you're subjective in this matter too, then i think we don't have much to talk about Anon. Support your opinions, i'll do the same with mine, there's a place for all of us.

>> No.26492736

Glad to be of help, have fun with whatever game you end up getting.

>> No.26492753

He asked me to take him through the actual grapple rules.

Which I did.

>> No.26492760

Yeah, I believe you. I just have no idea whatsoever what's normal or what's the usual majority, even where I live - I can basically go with what I've heard, but I don't have the hard numbers - so I'm kind of in the same boat as you. Added to that is the fact that RPGs are kind of an obscure hobby.

I'd love some statistics on it, preferably based on region. Would be cool.

No offense intended.

>> No.26492768

What this anon said. Nobody forces you to jump on every new edition of your game just because it's DA NEW EDITION!1

There's actually an advantage to old stuff. It's in a solid state now and won't be changed anymore.

>> No.26492769

>The difference is that I do not recommend that new players/groups play games based on system mastery/ivory tower design and that are full of trap options specifically designed to fuck with new players.
Because developers value mindfuck more than $$$ they get each time somebody buys new sourcebook. Interesting approach to economy and marketing Anon. Very interesting.

>> No.26492772

No, you didn't, read >>26492620
You also didn't address the follow-up rounds

>> No.26492785

Traps for newcomers.

>> No.26492793

And labeling any arguments against you as "buzzwords" won't make them less true.
It just shows your inability to defend your arguments.

>> No.26492798

Right, this thread has been such a hilarious thing to read. I'm aware that I'm so very late from the edition wars bandwagon but anyhow I'm going to present my own two cents about what to get and what not to get as a first rpg.

1) "point and click": go to your (F)LGS, find that rpg self, close your eyes and point into something. If it is a core rulebook/starter set, buy it. Most of rpgers I've met have utilized this method in their past. that is unless they have been bought to the hobby by some "elder evil" (= older gamer)

2) Go to your (F)LGS and ask for help. This however points towards the following
a) the store owner doesn't know what he is doing and introduces you to latest product he has gotten into his/hers store

b) the store owner hits you with the most expensive shit he can get his hands to "By the way, you really should buy our exclusive dice for your gaming. And this product line has great character portfolios so your players can record their process easily. Did I mention about..."

c) you will be presented either the most generic thing that sells hotcakes (Pathfinder, DnD4e, Dark Heresy, World of Darkness...) or something that is at least 20 or 30 years of old book that barely holds it's ink inside. Minor losses of sanity more than possible.

3) Buy something Local. This works if you know some rpg's creator lives nearby. Or in the unlike chance that you are non native english speaker who is not living in english speaking country: buy something written in your own language.

4) Go with the masses! Bou stuff that is hot right now.

5) Think what genre interests you and buy something from that line (fantasy, scifi, horror, high adventure...)

There are thousands of systems and everyone has their opinion what is a good starting rpg and what is not. If you just want to give it a shot you might as well google something akin to "free tabletop rpg" and then just go ramming with it. Unbalanced? Sure! Poorly written? You bet!


>> No.26492804

My first 3.5 char was a fighter, pure fighter even. I don't really regret it since the character was cool but if I knew better at the time I would've picked another melee class for him. Or at least better feats.

I should've actualy made the character in a different system. He doesn't work in D&D.

>> No.26492842

> No offense intended.
None taken.

In the end we're all living inside of our own, beautiful bubbles consisting mostly of biased opinions and beliefs that have less in common with actual reality than we think. Probably.

>> No.26492845

Yeah, I know. Couldn't help myself. Apologies.

>> No.26492862

3.x was specifically designed to "reward system mastery". They did this by making clearly superior and clearly inferior options so that players who had mastered the system would feel rewarded when they spot the bad options instead of taking them.
New players will by their nature lack system mastery and there for will likely pick the bad options and end up with weak characters that are a drain on the party and less fun to play because they end up being mechanically incapable of fulfilling the role/idea the player wanted for them.

>> No.26492878

>The difference is that I do not recommend that new players/groups play games based on system mastery/ivory tower design and that are full of trap options specifically designed to fuck with new players.
>options specifically designed to fuck with new player

>> No.26492893

>I know you're coming from the angle "and suddenly noone will play your old game with you"
I'm not saying it just for that. The other reason I'm saying it's risky is because I'm comparing it to pathfinder, which has all the rules available online for free. That means it would be less risky to first try out a game that needs little to no money investment than starting out with a game that needs money to get access to it's rules.

>> No.26492912

What's really hilarious is watching people used to 3.5 system mastery get their asses handed to them in PF when the options they usually try for fail horribly.

>> No.26492916

cont from

I'm more than aware that I'm just blabbering abaout stuff that most people have brought up already. But let me continue.

There are some very good freeformy and very rules light systems that are just dreamy things for newcomer (FATE and Dungeon World for example). However, if you have no idea where you are heading towards as a gamer and you have no history from larping/teathre/impro then it's going to be a hard and rough begining.

I have never touched any beginners box due my introducement for rpg were all thanks to my friends who had been playing Dnd 3.5 for a long time. I had some experience from drama, so when I started playing this "gamist" game where you could and could not do things based just from arbitary dice rolling were more than alien to me. However, my friends were good teachers and few of them had lot of patience to teach me.

Anyway. I was supposed to say that just hit those starter kits.

>> No.26492964

You're b;atantly claiming that there's some conspiracy against newcomers in any given RPG system.

Think about it long, and hard, imagine how does that look like from the point of view of a corporation that craves for every dollar we can spend. THINK.

>> No.26492970

Um... the guy I responded to recommended Pathfinder, a game based on a system designed around system mastery and loaded with trap options. These things make it bad for new players because they lack the system mastery the game is built around. Also it teaches new players that this is what RPGs are like when there are a plethora of options out there.
I recommended Dungeon World, a game with simple mechanics and an emphasis on story and narrative. These are good for players because simple rules are less likely to trip up new players and the narrative focus helps new players really get into their characters and the RP.

>> No.26492974

>FRIENDLY WARNING: Remember to take everything you hear with a grain of salt. Despite being good, helpful people in general, seasoned players like to present their personal, subjective opinions as universally acclaimed facts and truths.
/tg/ in a nutshell

>> No.26492987

>I'm comparing it to pathfinder, which has all the rules available online for free.
All the rules for every game are available online for free.
All at the same sight.

>> No.26493009

I'm not claiming any conspiracy.
I'm just reiterating what the designers of 3/3.5 have gone on record as saying. "System Mastery" and "trap options" are an integral part of 3.x.
This doesn't mean they are "out to get" new players. It means that their design is naturally bad for new players.

>> No.26493015

> I need to sell my product to as much newcomers as possible
> therefore i must make it less appealing to them
Pic related Anon. It's your marketing teacher.

>> No.26493026

Sure, sure Anon. It's probably because of that why Pathfinder dethroned D&D.

>> No.26493027

... Never expect malevolent intent when incompetence is the more likely answer?

I'm not sure that's true here though. Isn't there a couple of sources (like that Monte Cook interview) where it's stated that Ivory Tower design was intentional? (I think the term actually came from that interview?)

>> No.26493034

Tell that to Monte and the other designers of 3e. They've come right out and said this was part of their design intent.
It worked somehow but that doesn't make it good.

>> No.26493040

Check out / Google Monte Cook's Ivory Tower article. I'm pretty sure that's where he basically admits that some options are just better than others, because it makes the game more rewarding or something.

>> No.26493043

I'm playing a PF campaign right now and I accidentally killed my party with Black Tentacles.

Not exactly what I'd call getting my ass kicked.

>> No.26493057


>> No.26493068

> Someone reading that part.
> mfw

>> No.26493077

So you're saying Op should run some form of... nautical campaign?

>> No.26493081

It never "dethroned" anything.
PF rode on 3.5s coat tails and the standard edition hate.
4e out sold PF every quarter that they competed until WotC announced Next.
The issue was the D&D no longer dominated the market like it used to and Hasbro panicked. They had a good and profitable product but it didn't match what they had before because they were competing against their own old product so they made an attempt to win back the grognards while keeping the players that bought 4e.

If we're going by sales then 4e won out while the two games competed.
Hasbro dethroned D&D not Pathfinder.

>> No.26493089

>I'm not claiming any conspiracy.
Yes, you do.
Evil Wizards doing whatever it takes to lose at least 50% f audience.

Go to sleep Anon. You're clearly overworked.

>> No.26493101

>... Never expect malevolent intent when incompetence is the more likely answer?
Exactly this.

>> No.26493107

Monte flat out said that was his intent, and apologized for it.

>> No.26493111

Lets get some DW sheets out and make piratical characters!

A Kraken is shaking your ship apart with it's massive tentacles! What do you do?

>> No.26493118

I just assumed that you had Improved Grapple, since you didn't know the grapple rules, and wanted to do it.

Secondly, you asked about initiating a grapple, not about maintaining it.
(Nor did you point out that a monk can use flurry of blows to grapple a bajillion time at full BAB, for instance, but that's also beside the point.)

>> No.26493140

Like I said, the lead designer fucking admitted that they made trap options and system mastery core parts of the game.
This isn't a conspiracy against new players, it's just really shitty design that happens to work against new players.

>> No.26493148

Actually i've read it.
And, contrary to you, i understood it.
There's a VERY big difference between "i want to fuck things up on purpose" and "damn, things didn't went as i thought they will".

>> No.26493149

They literally are.

>go to find the article where Monte Cook flat out admits this and apologizes for it
>it's been deleted from his site

Well fuck. Was everything that happened just some sort of fevered dream?

>> No.26493152

Pretty much this.

>> No.26493159

He said it was their mistake to think it'll work.

>> No.26493160

I punch it!

>> No.26493169

The fact that you have to cop out like this is proof that the rules are convoluted.

>> No.26493174

And that's exactly what we claimed.
They never intended to "fuck things up", they just implemented shitty design ideas.
Them admitting it was shitty doesn't make it any less shitty.

>> No.26493201

Ok. You chose "reach" for your signature weapon (don't know how you got me to allow that on Fists) so that's a Hack 'n Slash roll.
Roll 2d6 + Str (should be a +2 at first level).

>> No.26493224

He said they failed to see how it'll work out, not that they wanted to fuck with new players. Come on, i'm non native english speaker and even i understand that.

>> No.26493239

No. I have a pastebin of the article around here somewhere.

>> No.26493252

I think he meant that "their intent" was to have system mastery and therefor trap options be a big part of the system, not that they meant to fuck with people.

>> No.26493254

>Let's reward system mastry by making shitty options only new players would choose

>> No.26493267

I don't know who are those mysterious "we", because as far as i can see, you were on your own, claiming that Wizards cam up with
> options -> specifically designed <- to fuck with new players.

>> No.26493283

Congrats, you've figured out why most of the fandom, even the 3aboos, hate Monte Cooke.

>> No.26493291

Here it is.


>> No.26493301

You are correct. I mispoke. I should have said that they "intentionally designed options that any person with an ounce of design sense would have seen would fuck with new players."

>> No.26493383

Why would you introduce people to roleplaying with such a complex system?
Use AD&D, preferably first edition. With Pathfinder or 3.0, 3.5, or 4th edition Dungeons and Dragons, you're going to just be running an incredibly unbalanced, boring game where first-time players will literally take hours to create characters. AD&D allows that character creation to be less than five minutes.

>> No.26493416


I'd say Games Cyclopedia if you HAVE to do D&D. Otherwise, go with something simpler and less loaded with archetypes and forced playstyle.

>> No.26494284

System mastery is often overquoted in 3.x

The real issue is that you were 12 when you sarted playing. It is, you know, most of the RPG community's first RPG. Most people who start on 4e have the same trouble.

Yes, there are fewer trap options in 4e, but in 3.x they aren't nearly so pronounced as people claim. People just remember a number of bad characters from their archives of brains and equate that to a bad system.

>> No.26494321

Legacy mechanics pretty much drag down the modern versions of D&D from being much more fun and focused.

>> No.26494328

When I was 11 years old my first character ever was a fighter abusing the spiked chain trick to make most enemies useless. Breaking the game by mistake is really easy.

>> No.26494380

The idea was to mimic the idea of "bad cards" from Magic: The Gathering. WotC's other department works on Magic. They create a lot of cards designed to appear good but being really bad in reality in order to give skilled players an advantage over the unskilled and reward them with satisfaction for long-term investment.

Applying this to an RPG is kind of dumb.

>> No.26494438

Eh, biggest issue I have with fighter is that it isn't fun. I mean, you shouldn't need to take two feats a piece to be able to grapple, trip, et al. That should come with the basic package.

But the feat system is real shittily done for non-casters.

>> No.26494439


Actually, I was 20. Because it didn't exist until then.

>they aren't nearly so pronounced as people claim

At bare minimum, two of the classes and a good dozen of the feats in the PHB, 3.0 and 3.5, are trap options. That's pretty fucking pronounced.

>> No.26494540

You're right. Now let me play my goddamn druid, I promise he won't make your fighter redundant.

>> No.26497304

>Why would you introduce people to roleplaying with such a complex system?
That's what I keep saying, but I never feel like I get my point across. There are too many fanboys and edition warriors drowning out coherent arguments, and whoever is asking for advice usually seems to have already decided to go with one of the modern, complicated editions despite his lack of knowledge. *Shrug* What are you gonna do?

>> No.26497388

I agree that pushing AD&D is only going half way. One of the Basics is a better place to begin. Not sure I'd go with Rules Cyclopedia though, as the consolidated approach may actually make it harder to digest for noobs. BECMI or BX is how I'd roll. But with that said, retroclones normally tidy things up a bit, so I'd recommend something like Labyrinth Lord or Swords & Wizardry White Box (even though the latter is an OD&D clone), especially since both are available to download for free.

>> No.26498812

A lot of people actually have been saying that.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.