Jump to content

jdizzy001

DND next

Recommended Posts

My biggest curiosity is going to be which system provides more adventure content.  Pathfinder has a lot of people in love with the adventure paths they crank out, simply because it takes a lot of the work out of DMing a long-running campaign. 

 

We're still happily playing 3.5, but we're running low on content these days... (as well as time to generate our own content.)   A switch to whichever game system has the best stories might be in the cards, but not for a while. 

One of the good things that I have heard about 5e is that the architecture is open enough that folks will be able to use the Pathfinder Adventure Paths without too much trouble.

 

As for 3.5... again, it is not at all difficult to convert Pathfinder adventures.

 

Back when Pathfinder was new... one of the big advantages was being able to use my 3.X library.

 

But over time, I have found myself using fewer and fewer 3.X material. The Pathfinder material is rock solid, and serves my needs better than my legacy collection.

 

I would suggest looking at the Pathfinder rules, the PDF is only $10, and is worth having if you decide to jump into the game.

 

There are also PDFs of all of the 3.5 Pathfinder Adventure Paths - I am currently running Curse of the Crimson Throne, which was originally a 3.5 release. The ones that you will want are marked OGL here. Tryy out one of the adventures that kick off a Path - Burnt offerings has a very fun beginning, with a whole lot of goblins running around, setting things on fire.

 

So, even if you stick with 3.5, Paizo has some stuff for you. ::): I have run Rise of the Runelords, and it was pretty danged ggo, though I prefer Curse of the Crimson Throne. Legacy of fire is one that I have read, but never run. Reaper's Gnoll figures will see a lot of play in the first bit - and then you get into a war between the Djinn and the Efreet.

 

I have neither read nor run Second Darkness, so that one is kind of a mystery to me.

 

The Auld Grump

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Auld Grump!  We've got a couple of copies of the Pathfinder Player's Guide, and some adventure path books already.  My hubby is running the Skull & Shackles AP, which was a 3.5 series done by Dungeon before the end, plus I've got Savage Tide. 

 

There's a point where it's just easier to use the Pathfinder rules when using Pathfinder content, but I'll definitely check out the Crimson Throne.  It's not that I don't like Pathfinder, I'm just still at the point where I feel like it's a tad too amped up.  Perhaps it's just that I don't like the changes to clerics & turning. 

 

Either way, I'm open to having my mind changed as to what's the preferred gaming system in our house.  I'm going to hold off until the next D&D thing is sorted, though.  ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Auld Grump, my Google-fu has totally failed. I resign myself that I shall not know the sordid details. Maybe it's best that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Auld Grump, my Google-fu has totally failed. I resign myself that I shall not know the sordid details. Maybe it's best that way.

Try looking for that 'Guards at the Gate' quote - that and the 'Traipsing Through the Faerie Rings' quote were the two big buckets of gasoline poured on the fire. ::P:

 

It is worth mentioning that most of the quotes that had the fans up in arms came from one person - James Wyatt.  I believe that he was lead on the project, so his comments were heard more widely, and carried more weight. He also wrote the two preview books that were where those quotes came from. (A lot of folks hated the very idea of those preview books - advertising that would have been in Dragon, but were instead being sold for $20 each - the same price as the 3e Players Handbook....)

 

It is also worth noting that last I had heard he was nowhere near 5e.... (He is now in boardgames, I believe.)

 

He did more than a little damage to the reputation of 4e, even before it was released.

 

The Auld Grump

Edited by TheAuldGrump
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Auld Grump!  We've got a couple of copies of the Pathfinder Player's Guide, and some adventure path books already.  My hubby is running the Skull & Shackles AP, which was a 3.5 series done by Dungeon before the end, plus I've got Savage Tide. 

 

There's a point where it's just easier to use the Pathfinder rules when using Pathfinder content, but I'll definitely check out the Crimson Throne.  It's not that I don't like Pathfinder, I'm just still at the point where I feel like it's a tad too amped up.  Perhaps it's just that I don't like the changes to clerics & turning. 

 

Either way, I'm open to having my mind changed as to what's the preferred gaming system in our house.  I'm going to hold off until the next D&D thing is sorted, though.  ^_^

Actually, Skull & Shackles is Pathfinder, not 3.5 - and is very, very good. (Brought to you by pirates, and the letter Arrrrr....)

 

*EDIT* Or, more likely, you swapped the two Paths - Savage Tides was in Dungeon. (And is also very good - a return to The Savage Coast. ::):

 

If ever I run Skull & Shackles (time, o' time, where hast thou fled?) then I will have to make The Maiden of the High Seas - a PDF model ship from World Works Games - the thing dominates a table. (I have had two of them wear out on me - but they both saw a lot of use.) It even gets mention in the second adventure of the Path. :lol:

mohs.jpg

If you don't mind a bit (okay, a lot) of paper modeling then it makes a great ship for the PCs.

 

*EDIT 2* The ship also has an interior - I made a partial build for use in Crimson Throne - there is an encounter in a moored hulk that is used as part of a red light district.

 

The Auld Grump

Edited by TheAuldGrump
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It all boils down to your group. 4e was very combat focused but the skill challenges were great! Skill challenges were all about rp. Sadly it was often over looked. My 4e group had some great skill challenges. To include wrestling elven guards, wrestling the wandering dwarf lucha, being chased by a purple worm, performing a dance off, rallying local troops to help defend their town, and long treks across oceans and barren wastelands. One thing i've noticed about different games is the role of the roll I'm the eyes of the author. Wotc places great emphasis on rolling the dice to find out what happens. Hence their are a lot of mechanical rules for task resolution. That is also why we see comments like, skip to the part where you start rolling dice. Other authors who release rpg's focus on rolling the dice only when it really matters and rp'ing everything else. Neither is bad, it just boils down to personal and group preference.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As my sig suggests I'm a 4E fan. :) I like 4E because it was a very simple system to mess with and build my own content, you can do a lot as a DM very quickly which is important in the low time availability of adult hood.

 

That said I've been doing some Next play lately and it works as DnD, it reminds me very much of playing 2E but with a lot learnt from 3E and 4E to make it a lot better as a game. However from watching the WotC bodies play Scourge of the Swordcoast there is a lot still to learn about the final game. Also its worth noting that the "rules light" approach (ok its not really rules light) is deliberate - the "rules heavy" supplement is already in the works to add more 3E/4E style tactical combat to Next. Though I've been using minis with very little trouble in my play testing already, but that is hardly a strong indicator as I have a lot of table experience with their use.

 

As far as adventure content I own a lot 1E, 2E and 4E content and I totally expect to be able to easily use all of it with Next, that is truth be told one of the big selling points for me. While the PC stuff from older editions isn't a good match mostly from the DM side jumping stuff from another edition to Next is very easy, and having a full monster manual will make it much easier.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It all boils down to your group. 4e was very combat focused but the skill challenges were great! Skill challenges were all about rp. Sadly it was often over looked. My 4e group had some great skill challenges. To include wrestling elven guards, wrestling the wandering dwarf lucha, being chased by a purple worm, performing a dance off, rallying local troops to help defend their town, and long treks across oceans and barren wastelands. One thing i've noticed about different games is the role of the roll I'm the eyes of the author. Wotc places great emphasis on rolling the dice to find out what happens. Hence their are a lot of mechanical rules for task resolution. That is also why we see comments like, skip to the part where you start rolling dice. Other authors who release rpg's focus on rolling the dice only when it really matters and rp'ing everything else. Neither is bad, it just boils down to personal and group preference.

 

Interesting. I thought the skill challenge system was a brilliant experiment when it came out, but, for whatever reason, it never seemed to work for me or my group. We would always try to knuckle down to the RP portion of the challenge, but it often seemed to boil down to going around the table rolling dice until we got a final result. I give the designers tons of points for trying to codify an "encounter" system for role play though.

 

If it worked well for your group, then that's awesome. It's definitely something I think more designers should experiment with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't actually have an opinion on this, because if I get my way soon then I'll never have to DM again.  Then I can devote all my time to building things and painting little people.  I don't care what edition it is if I get that. 

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't actually have an opinion on this, because if I get my way soon then I'll never have to DM again.  Then I can devote all my time to building things and painting little people.  I don't care what edition it is if I get that. 

That sounds awesome, while I love DMing after 15 years of being the only person I know to take it on if anyone wants to play I REALLY miss playing...only problem is I don't trust anyone else to put as much effort or thought into it as I do so I still don't know how enjoyable it would be *sigh* maybe one day lol

Edited by Crimson_king_of_the_tower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty ambivalent about editions. The edition I know the most about is 2e. It has lots of issues, but I've always held to the quote at the beginning of the 2e DMG "The rules are only guidelines," and embraced it in all of its wonder. When I run games I generally do so in 2e, just because I know enough to minimize the downtime. I'm not constantly fumbling to find mechanics. I never got much of a chance to play 3e. I never played 3.5, or 4e. Pathfinder was just coming into its own when I started sticking my toes back into the water. I've since mucked about with the rules for it, BECMI, and many of the various clones. The reason I prefer Pathfinder is simple. The world they have built is superior, to me, than any other I have ever encountered. The feel of it. The world building is superb, which is also reason I often re-read old issues of Dungeon. Given the chance to play a campaign in any ruleset I will happily do so, as long as the GM is patient with my lack of knowledge, and willing to explain as we go. I really hope that Next is a success. I've said before, and I really believe, that any interest can only be beneficial for all tabletop gamers as a whole.Cheers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't actually have an opinion on this, because if I get my way soon then I'll never have to DM again.  Then I can devote all my time to building things and painting little people.  I don't care what edition it is if I get that. 

That sounds awesome, while I love DMing after 15 years of being the only person I know to take it on if anyone wants to play I REALLY miss playing...only problem is I don't trust anyone else to put as much effort or thought into it as I do so I still don't know how enjoyable it would be *sigh* maybe one day lol

 

 

I eventually realized that it's not being a DM I hate - it's that plus buying everything, building everything, painting everything, and cleaning up after everybody leaves.

 

Honestly, I had become so much of the game it would have been as well to just play by myself. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It all boils down to your group. 4e was very combat focused but the skill challenges were great! Skill challenges were all about rp. Sadly it was often over looked. My 4e group had some great skill challenges. To include wrestling elven guards, wrestling the wandering dwarf lucha, being chased by a purple worm, performing a dance off, rallying local troops to help defend their town, and long treks across oceans and barren wastelands. One thing i've noticed about different games is the role of the roll I'm the eyes of the author. Wotc places great emphasis on rolling the dice to find out what happens. Hence their are a lot of mechanical rules for task resolution. That is also why we see comments like, skip to the part where you start rolling dice. Other authors who release rpg's focus on rolling the dice only when it really matters and rp'ing everything else. Neither is bad, it just boils down to personal and group preference.

 

 

Interesting. I thought the skill challenge system was a brilliant experiment when it came out, but, for whatever reason, it never seemed to work for me or my group. We would always try to knuckle down to the RP portion of the challenge, but it often seemed to boil down to going around the table rolling dice until we got a final result. I give the designers tons of points for trying to codify an "encounter" system for role play though.

 

If it worked well for your group, then that's awesome. It's definitely something I think more designers should experiment with.

At first our skill challenges were very similar, everyone takes a turn rolling until we get or dont get, the result we need. Then me and my co DM spent hours reading up on building skill challenges from the dmg and dmg2. We learned a few tricks which we now use in other rpg's to which we apply the skill chalenge. A few things we encorporated are: only those trained in the skill may attempt the check, or those untrained depending on the circumstance. Only 1 person can check, the other pc's may attempt to assist (provide bonuses to the primary roller). Another method I used but my co dm did not (he didnt like it), everyone rolls and the team earns 1 success only if 51% of the team succeeds. On the other side of the coin, failure should mean something. Loss of hp, loss of heal surges, loss of ability score (temporary), extra bad guys to fight in the next encounter, even death (I only used this one once, but talk about nail biting). To think, failure to pass a skill challenge results in pc death.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I eventually realized that it's not being a DM I hate - it's that plus buying everything, building everything, painting everything, and cleaning up after everybody leaves.

 

Honestly, I had become so much of the game it would have been as well to just play by myself.

 

Ah yes. The good old days.

 

Been there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×