Give a grumpy old gamer some advice (Pathfinder)

[The Ugly American]

Some years ago -- never mind how long precisely -- I cut my teeth on the blue box D&D and then 1st Ed. AD&D. I played the heck out of it, and then played 2nd ed. extensively. I drifted into other systems and haven't picked up any D&D product since well before the appearance of 3e. Now I'm set to play a Pathfinder game (first session tomorrow) and I'm looking for any good advice on how to make my transition easier. :)

I'm very excited about the whole thing, and Pathfinder looks fantastic, but it also looks very different from what I'm used to.

[Tequila Sunrise]

Wow, you're in for an interesting experience. If you feel overwhelmed by all the options, take a deep breath and just pick something that complements your PC's role in the game [read: usually in combat].

[The Ugly American]

Wow, you're in for an interesting experience. If you feel overwhelmed by all the options, take a deep breath and just pick something that complements your PC's role in the game [read: usually in combat].

I rolled up a human Rogue (note to self: not Thief) who happens to have a 17 Intelligence. I'm looking at the Arcane Trickster down the line...but it's all a bit overwhelming, as you say.

[Tori Bergquist]

I think you'll end up enjoying it.....hopefully you have a good DM (I have found most of what soured me on D20 in the the past as a player had to do with bad DMs and not the system as written). But that said, Pathfinder is an excellent refinement of the D20 system, so hopefully you'll enjoy it.

As a GM for my group, the one thing that tripped up some players new to Pathfinder that I noticed was just what, exactly, you can do in a given combat round, and how to pull it off. If your GM is kind enough to offer up some quick reference cards for combat, that might help; don't be afraid to ask for clarification on just what you can and can't do in a round.

I also suggest trying to precalculate your attack bonuses and such before hand, and if you can, have your GM or another knowledgable player double-check the numbers if your concerned. It will speed up play immensely if those numbers are all set to be added to a die roll without fussing with them each turn.

[The Ugly American]

I think you'll end up enjoying it.....hopefully you have a good DM (I have found most of what soured me on D20 in the the past as a player had to do with bad DMs and not the system as written). But that said, Pathfinder is an excellent refinement of the D20 system, so hopefully you'll enjoy it.

As a GM for my group, the one thing that tripped up some players new to Pathfinder that I noticed was just what, exactly, you can do in a given combat round, and how to pull it off. If your GM is kind enough to offer up some quick reference cards for combat, that might help; don't be afraid to ask for clarification on just what you can and can't do in a round.

I also suggest trying to precalculate your attack bonuses and such before hand, and if you can, have your GM or another knowledgable player double-check the numbers if your concerned. It will speed up play immensely if those numbers are all set to be added to a die roll without fussing with them each turn.

Ooh, excellent advice, thanks! It does look like everything's changed since I was familiar with the game, so reference cards would be awesome.

And I know what you mean about bad GMs -- I had Savage Worlds wrecked for me in just that way, which sucks because a lot of people just love the game and I can't bear to play it.

[Ferrus Animus]

OK, the system has a lot of fiddly bits.

DON'T PANIC

It's not as hard as it looks like.
I recommend just looking at the things you need and disregard the stuff you don't. Information overload is to be avoided. When you're unsure aout something ask, and if you don't know how to evolve your character the friendly people around here will probably help.

Knowing that system can be quite some work, so I really recommend to not overdo it. Read what your class skills do, and your feats. Ignore magic until you're prepared to use Use Magic Device or want to go wizard, etc...

[DeadZa]

I'd suggest playing either a Wizard, Cleric, or Druid. That way you matter to the game. I hear good things about the Paladin and Ranger though too since they have enhanced spell progression. But if you love being a door-stop the Fighter is still the best at what he does for sure!


On a none hater and entirely serious note also be sure to ask what house-rules are in effect. 3.x may not require house-rules to work but most often they'll be present. if you're brand new to the fiddly system a bunch of homebrew fiddly bits could make things even more problematic especially if something pivotal to your character build/concept is disallowed or altered.

[smug]

Nothing wrong with the Rogue, and in Pathfinder your sneak attack (broadly, backstab) works on just about anything (wheras in 3.5 it could get a bit frustrating). A 17 Int means you can skillmonkey to your heart's content, too.

I've always wanted to play an Arcane Trickster. The one thing about the 3.x multiclass rules is that you want to think somewhat in advance about when you switch classes.

[Ferrus Animus]

Oh, and check if only PF material is allowed or all of the 3.X books.
Some Arcane Tricksters really want some of that stuff.

[The Ugly American]

OK, the system has a lot of fiddly bits.

DON'T PANIC

It's not as hard as it looks like.
I recommend just looking at the things you need and disregard the stuff you don't. Information overload is to be avoided. When you're unsure aout something ask, and if you don't know how to evolve your character the friendly people around here will probably help.

Knowing that system can be quite some work, so I really recommend to not overdo it. Read what your class skills do, and your feats. Ignore magic until you're prepared to use Use Magic Device or want to go wizard, etc...

Excellent advice. I do love fiddly bits so that's not daunting to me, but I know I'd feel a bit overwhelmed if I tried to comprehend everything in one viewing.

[The Ugly American]

I'd suggest playing either a Wizard, Cleric, or Druid. That way you matter to the game. I hear good things about the Paladin and Ranger though too since they have enhanced spell progression. But if you love being a door-stop the Fighter is still the best at what he does for sure!


On a none hater and entirely serious note also be sure to ask what house-rules are in effect. 3.x may not require house-rules to work but most often they'll be present. if you're brand new to the fiddly system a bunch of homebrew fiddly bits could make things even more problematic especially if something pivotal to your character build/concept is disallowed or altered.

Well, I'm locked into a Rogue for the moment. LOL And that's fine, because I'm really looking forward to seeing what the class can do, and I have a fun concept.

As far as house rules go, the GM is determined to have none at the beginning, because he wants to try out the system as written before making adjustments.

[The Ugly American]

Nothing wrong with the Rogue, and in Pathfinder your sneak attack (broadly, backstab) works on just about anything (wheras in 3.5 it could get a bit frustrating). A 17 Int means you can skillmonkey to your heart's content, too.

I've always wanted to play an Arcane Trickster. The one thing about the 3.x multiclass rules is that you want to think somewhat in advance about when you switch classes.

I've already decided I want to level up a few times as a Rogue before going to another class, and hopefully by that time I will have a better grasp on he rules. The Arcane Trickster looks like a hoot, but I'm a little worried about having three classes in like 8 or 9 levels or whatever it is. Seems like the peanut butter would be spread pretty thin on the bagel.

[The Ugly American]

Oh, and check if only PF material is allowed or all of the 3.X books.
Some Arcane Tricksters really want some of that stuff.

I'm thinking it's just Pathfinder for the moment. The DM is keen to run the system as-is so we can all see how the parts fit together. As he settles in he will probably allow some more monkeying with this and that.

[AusJeb]

One of the key Rogue skills introduced in 3.X was Tumble. Pathfinder makes it part of Acrobatics (http://sites.google.com/site/pathfinderogc/Home/skills/acrobatics). This skill is essential for setting up sneak attacks and for getting out of harm's way. You will want to have max ranks in this skill until you can get where you want to go without having to worry about rolling.

Other skills where most Rogues want to spend their skill points include Climb, Diplomacy, Perception, and Stealth. Skills you may want to pick up depending on your character concept include Bluff, Sense Motive, and Sleight of Hand. The usefulness of some of these may depend on the type of campaign and your GM's play style. So, you might want to discuss your skill choices with him.

Use Magic Device is a special case. At first it appears useful, but you won't really use it until you can reliably hit a 20-25 DC. So, you're better off ignoring it for awhile and then making mass purchases of skill points at higher levels.

Good luck.

[Thazar]

One of the key Rogue skills introduced in 3.X was Tumble. Pathfinder makes it part of Acrobatics (http://sites.google.com/site/pathfinderogc/Home/skills/acrobatics). This skill is essential for setting up sneak attacks and for getting out of harm's way. You will want to have max ranks in this skill until you can get where you want to go without having to worry about rolling.

Good luck.

Pathfinder has pretty much removed the ability to get a skill to the point you never even need to bother rolling. Casting a spell defensively and tumble were to items that after a certain level were zero fail choices. Not anymore (for the better IMHO.)

Acrobatics takes a targets BAB into consideration in tumble moves now. (Via the CMD mechanic.)

[The Ugly American]

One of the key Rogue skills introduced in 3.X was Tumble. Pathfinder makes it part of Acrobatics (http://sites.google.com/site/pathfinderogc/Home/skills/acrobatics). This skill is essential for setting up sneak attacks and for getting out of harm's way. You will want to have max ranks in this skill until you can get where you want to go without having to worry about rolling.

Other skills where most Rogues want to spend their skill points include Climb, Diplomacy, Perception, and Stealth. Skills you may want to pick up depending on your character concept include Bluff, Sense Motive, and Sleight of Hand. The usefulness of some of these may depend on the type of campaign and your GM's play style. So, you might want to discuss your skill choices with him.

Use Magic Device is a special case. At first it appears useful, but you won't really use it until you can reliably hit a 20-25 DC. So, you're better off ignoring it for awhile and then making mass purchases of skill points at higher levels.

Good luck.

One nice thing about playing an Intelligence 17 human is that I'll have skill ranks out the tuchus, 12 per level right now. The other players told me that I'll have problems spending them all as I level up, and I can see where this would be true after a few levels, especially if I stick with Rogue rather than multiclassing into Wizard with an eye to becoming an Arcane Trickster or branch into Duelist. So hopefully as I pick up levels, I'll be able to figure out a little more of the system and realize for myself where it's most profitable to spend them. I hope. LOL

[smug]

I've already decided I want to level up a few times as a Rogue before going to another class, and hopefully by that time I will have a better grasp on he rules. The Arcane Trickster looks like a hoot, but I'm a little worried about having three classes in like 8 or 9 levels or whatever it is. Seems like the peanut butter would be spread pretty thin on the bagel.

Well, levels in arcane trickster increment your spellcasting levels and your sneak attack (as I recall), so it's not like it's three completely separate professions.

[Aldor]

Two things are really important for you to know in order to have a good performance in combat as a rogue: Rules for attacks of opportunity caused by movement, and flanking.

As for the skills, just work with the character's concept and the pooints will fall naturally :)

[The Ugly American]

Thanks for all the good advice. I'm really looking forward to playing on Tuesday night, and I'll definitely let you all know how it goes. :)

[Ferrus Animus]

Short advice on the arcane trickster:

It's basically rogue and wizard mixed into one, like some dual classes in older editions.
To qualify for it you need to be a 3rd-level rogue and an 3rd-level wizard (or 4th-level sorcerer).
This course of development has the downside that you basically have the capabilities of 2 3rd-level characters with only one pool of actions at 6th level, which makes you quite a lot weaker than pure characters. Depending on the group that might not be an issue. A few levels later you start to get on par again, but once you took all levels of arcane trickster the problem resurfaces.
One can work around that, but has to know the capabilities.
So think a little about your choices, it's worth it.

Oh and ray spells can be used for sneak attack.;)

[Bruce Leenomorph]

Good luck, Ugly (heh). I just joined a PF game myself, and while we haven't started yet, we will do so soon. It's just three of us players right now: a dwarven Fighter, a human Wizard and my elven Monk. Reading through the stuff so far on the PRD, I'm really pleased with the changes I see.

With the Monk, for example, it looked at first like just a few minor changes, but in the process of creating a character I've seen that all that stuff adds up to quite a bit. I like what they did with flurry of blows and the ki pool function I can see getting a lot of use. We're going to be doing some Forgotten Realms action to start, since the DM is also going to be running PF for the first time, and I'm really looking forward to it. This will be my first game in quite some time.

[The Ugly American]

Short advice on the arcane trickster:

It's basically rogue and wizard mixed into one, like some dual classes in older editions.
To qualify for it you need to be a 3rd-level rogue and an 3rd-level wizard (or 4th-level sorcerer).
This course of development has the downside that you basically have the capabilities of 2 3rd-level characters with only one pool of actions at 6th level, which makes you quite a lot weaker than pure characters. Depending on the group that might not be an issue. A few levels later you start to get on par again, but once you took all levels of arcane trickster the problem resurfaces.
One can work around that, but has to know the capabilities.
So think a little about your choices, it's worth it.

Oh and ray spells can be used for sneak attack.;)

Excellent. :)

That was my impression too of splitting levels between classes -- it's a long term game, and you need to need to have both a plan and patience because it's really easy to cripple yourself if you don't know what you're doing.

[The Ugly American]

Good luck, Ugly (heh). I just joined a PF game myself, and while we haven't started yet, we will do so soon. It's just three of us players right now: a dwarven Fighter, a human Wizard and my elven Monk. Reading through the stuff so far on the PRD, I'm really pleased with the changes I see.

With the Monk, for example, it looked at first like just a few minor changes, but in the process of creating a character I've seen that all that stuff adds up to quite a bit. I like what they did with flurry of blows and the ki pool function I can see getting a lot of use. We're going to be doing some Forgotten Realms action to start, since the DM is also going to be running PF for the first time, and I'm really looking forward to it. This will be my first game in quite some time.

A monk, eh? Well keep me posted on how it goes! I'm really looking forward to finding out all I can about the system.

[ArcTan]

Despite a lot of the way hype has categorized the two, I'd say Pathfinder/3.5 and 4e are both about as different from 2e as they are from each other, and there's no real sense in which Pathfinder/3.5 is more "old school" or more like older editions than 4e is. (Indeed, quite a lot of the things people complained about with 3e that "changed everything" were reversed in 4e.)

I recommend checking them both out if you're interested in what it is people call "D&D" these days.

[The Ugly American]

Despite a lot of the way hype has categorized the two, I'd say Pathfinder/3.5 and 4e are both about as different from 2e as they are from each other, and there's no real sense in which Pathfinder/3.5 is more "old school" or more like older editions than 4e is. (Indeed, quite a lot of the things people complained about with 3e that "changed everything" were reversed in 4e.)

I recommend checking them both out if you're interested in what it is people call "D&D" these days.

I have looked at 4e and it didn't do anything for me. I can see where some folks would like it, but it's not for me. Pathfinder is much more to my taste.

On the other hand, I think it's great that D&D has two viable options right now. I think it can only help the hobby, really.

[Simple Man]

Starting up a Pathfinder game, my only real advice is that if you do not want to suck, dodge playing a Human, a Fighter, and by the gods, not a Human Fighter.

If you played back in AD&D2 days, it's about the same power level differentiation. Being a Human Fighter in Pathfinder blows just as much now as it did then.

Now, there were a lot of interesting changes to the Monk, the Ranger is the best fighting class now, Sorcerers and Wizards have something other than spell use to tell them apart, and I even like the slight nerfing that Clerics got. There are a lot of cool things about Pathfinder. Playing a Human Fighter isn't one of them.

Otherwise, go nuts and have fun!

[blah & meh]

If Pathfinder doesn't work out for you, you might want to give the new edition of Hackmaster a try (currently just one book - Hackmaster Basic - with more additions to come that will make up Hackmaster Advanced).

www.kenzerco.com

[smug]

If Pathfinder doesn't work out for you, you might want to give the new edition of Hackmaster a try (currently just one book - Hackmaster Basic - with more additions to come that will make up Hackmaster Advanced).

www.kenzerco.com

Fantasycraft also looks pretty cool.

However, he's one player in a game; I doubt he's getting to pick.

Not that I don't love Pathfinder, because I do.

[The Ugly American]

Yeah, I'm one guy in a group that's assembling specifically to play Pathfinder. I've never met these guys before, except some of them at a character creation session.

[DeadZa]

Let us know how it works out, I'm curious how your unique perspective will take to Pathfinder.

[The Ugly American]

We had the first session last night. After all the finalization of characters and whatnot, we didn't have a lot of time to play, but from what I can see I think I'm going to like it a whole lot. The skills system is a lot more subtle than what I'm used to from D&D, and it will make playing a Rogue a lot of fun (I like to be able to do a lot of stuff and I don' usually care about doing a massive amount of damage in combat). I didn't get a chance to try out the neat rule where I get my extra surprise damage die when flanking someone who's already engaged, but I think that will be a tremendous amount of fun.

To be truthful, it seems like they've made a lot of changes that have made the game more interesting even at 1st level, because right from the get-go you can do a lot more stuff no matter what class you're playing (possibly Fighter excepted, from what I've heard). I'm really appreciating the care and attention Paizo has shown in development of Pathfinder, because it shows in a lot of little details. It's obvious that someone has loved this game right from the get-go.

[joela]

We had the first session last night. After all the finalization of characters and whatnot, we didn't have a lot of time to play, but from what I can see I think I'm going to like it a whole lot. The skills system is a lot more subtle than what I'm used to from D&D, and it will make playing a Rogue a lot of fun (I like to be able to do a lot of stuff and I don' usually care about doing a massive amount of damage in combat). I didn't get a chance to try out the neat rule where I get my extra surprise damage die when flanking someone who's already engaged, but I think that will be a tremendous amount of fun.

To be truthful, it seems like they've made a lot of changes that have made the game more interesting even at 1st level, because right from the get-go you can do a lot more stuff no matter what class you're playing (possibly Fighter excepted, from what I've heard). I'm really appreciating the care and attention Paizo has shown in development of Pathfinder, because it shows in a lot of little details. It's obvious that someone has loved this game right from the get-go.

Glad you had a fun time :D

[Shisumo]

Looking forward, if you're seriously considering the Arcane Trickster idea, I'd suggest picking up the surprise attack talent when you get your 2nd rogue level, and specializing as a diviner for your wizard levels. The combination of surprise attack and the diviner's forewarned ability makes for some extremely deadly surprise rounds!

[DeadZa]

To be truthful, it seems like they've made a lot of changes that have made the game more interesting even at 1st level, because right from the get-go you can do a lot more stuff no matter what class you're playing (possibly Fighter excepted, from what I've heard). I'm really appreciating the care and attention Paizo has shown in development of Pathfinder, because it shows in a lot of little details. It's obvious that someone has loved this game right from the get-go.

To play the devils advocate a bit: but if you skipped out on 3.x how exactly can you tell what Paizo did to update Pathfinder over the work of 3.x done by Wizards of the Coast? Or am I misunderstanding your original post in that you have 3.x experience but just never bought any product?

Now that said, it's always good to see someone have a grand old time with D&D regardless of edition. I'm wondering how you as a 2nd Ed player would compare character creation between the editions and which you think is faster/better. I'm just really curious of a lot of your opinions in a nerdy anthropological way, its like discovering a lost tribe of gamer. You don't have any particular vendetta in the edition wars and have a totally fresh opinion about a game that to me, is quite old.

[The Ugly American]

To play the devils advocate a bit: but if you skipped out on 3.x how exactly can you tell what Paizo did to update Pathfinder over the work of 3.x done by Wizards of the Coast? Or am I misunderstanding your original post in that you have 3.x experience but just never bought any product?

Now that said, it's always good to see someone have a grand old time with D&D regardless of edition. I'm wondering how you as a 2nd Ed player would compare character creation between the editions and which you think is faster/better. I'm just really curious of a lot of your opinions in a nerdy anthropological way, its like discovering a lost tribe of gamer. You don't have any particular vendetta in the edition wars and have a totally fresh opinion about a game that to me, is quite old.

Oops, I was unclear. I meant to say that compared to 2nd edition, which was the last edition I have any experience with, they lavished care and attention, balanced the classes, and gave everyone something cool and interesting to do at every level. I've followed some of the discussion surrounding the update of 3.5 to Pathfinder, but never having played 3.5 I can't comment on it. As a strictly old school D&Der, it's a little amazing how much has changed, but whether Paizo or WotC changed it I can't say. :)

[The Ugly American]

Looking forward, if you're seriously considering the Arcane Trickster idea, I'd suggest picking up the surprise attack talent when you get your 2nd rogue level, and specializing as a diviner for your wizard levels. The combination of surprise attack and the diviner's forewarned ability makes for some extremely deadly surprise rounds!

Right now I'm batting a few ideas around. I'm considering Arcane Trickster because of the character's intelligence, Duelist because of the character's Dexterity, and Shadowdancer because...well, because Shadowdancer is frickin' cool. The thing I worry about is the multiclassing necessary to get to Arcane Trickster, though that's not a problem with Shadowdancer or , IIRC, the Duelist. On the other hand, it might be more fun just to stick with a Rogue. Honestly, I don't know. LOL