Rants of a returning old guy.

[bruthaflex]

First, I am thankful to all of you who contribute to the various rpg forums that i have lurked about the last year.

I am returning to the game after a long hiatus. I played 1e in the eighties while in high school, and I played other genres of rpgs in the '90's while in the navy.


My 12 year old son and I have been playing console rpg's like Oblivion, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect. I started to get bored with scripted AI, and I started to research pen and paper games again. I have snooped through various forums and websites, picked up some books, dnd 1e, 2e, and recently some 3.5 stuff.

In my 1e experience, we have always used the rules as guidelines, because they were hard for me to follow.

The 2e stuff looks like its been reorganized, but I don't like the fact that it's been censored. I do like the flavor of the 1e and 2e supplements, ie The complete Wizards Handbook, etc. they provide alot of background info for character back stories.

My son and I were invited to a 3.5e campaign, and I was eager to learn the game while playing, with hopes of starting my own campaign for my son and his friends, and any of my gamer buddies that might be interested.

I thought I would post my impressions here and get some feedback.

Organization: I like the way the rules are organized, I can find what i am looking for relatively quickly.

Mechanics: I like the feel of the d20 system, and like the dc's. I am suprised that many of the character sheets I have seen are as convoluted as ever. They have the same layout as the cumbersome sheets I used in the '80's.
I thought it would be cool to have a page that summarizes a characters main abilities and usable skills or spells. The entirety of the skills/feats/spells is overwhelming! I am impressed at the level of detail, but as a new player, investing 20-25 points in 50 or so different skills is daunting.
I think that the game could benefit from a 0-level start. It is very hard to role-play being an expert in alchemy, architecture, history or anything else.

I think first level players start out with two much info. This probably doesn't bother you experts as much. I also wonder if most current players are conditioned to the MTG mechanics, and are used to playing games with a 60 card deck.

3.5 Supplements: There is alot of stuff out there, as far as the official WTC goes, it all seems to be from the same template; new classes, epic stuff new feats and spells, oh and by the way, here is enough fluff so that you can claim to have a backstory. The early edition supplements seemed to have more story and flavor. (Am I really getting so old that I am starting to consider fluff to be an important element of the game?)

If you read this post and got to my questions, God bless you!

I am looking for: links to any 3.5 and 2e stuff that might help. Especially wordbuilding background stuff.

I thought it would be nice to make the spells into cards for easy reference,
any ideas on streamlining stuff or making it easier to use would be great.

BTW: I am broke and cannot afford my game habit, I usually buy my books second hand, and try to use the srd, and any other free stuff I can find. I noticed that alot of 2e stuff is pretty cheap on ebay.

And fro you guys that think the old guy just needs to quit complaining and adjust, I have 2 questions:

What is a good starting package for someone who wants to learn the game as they go?
and
Is there any old ccg stuff I can pick up to become culturally literate to today's players that ties into the same fantasy setting?

Thanks for your ear fellas.

Bruthaflex

[faceroll]

Maybe try 4e? It's much more simplified, streamlined, the books actually give you good advice for starting packages, and still feels like D&D.

[holywhippet]

You might want to consider looking over 4E if you haven't already. It simplifies things a lot more than 3E - you don't need to remember as many incidental bonuses and stuff. It also removes a lot of the crazy abuse possible in 3E, which unfortunately means half the fun sometimes.

Best way to learn would be to join a group willing to accept a rookie who asks a lot of questions.

CCGs? Not really, none are an exact match for D&D. There is a D&D board game but I'm not sure what kind of rules it is using.

[Mutazoia]

{Scrubbed}


I thought it would be nice to make the spells into cards for easy reference, any ideas on streamlining stuff or making it easier to use would be great.

A friend of mine copied the spell descriptions onto index cards and had a small index card "wallet" for the ones his character was using for a particular campaign. I was once tempted to do CCG style playing cards for each spell (complete with artwork) but realized that some spells would need more room than that, or really tiny print...and I didn't want to spend that much time on it.


BTW: I am broke and cannot afford my game habit, I usually buy my books second hand, and try to use the srd, and any other free stuff I can find. I noticed that alot of 2e stuff is pretty cheap on ebay.

See above


And fro you guys that think the old guy just needs to quit complaining and adjust, I have 2 questions:

What is a good starting package for someone who wants to learn the game as they go?
and
Is there any old ccg stuff I can pick up to become culturally literate to today's players that ties into the same fantasy setting?

This is the interwebs...everybody thinks everybody else is complaining and should just adujust.

[Mutazoia]

You might want to consider looking over 4E if you haven't already. It simplifies things a lot more than 3E - you don't need to remember as many incidental bonuses and stuff. It also removes a lot of the crazy abuse possible in 3E, which unfortunately means half the fun sometimes.

Best way to learn would be to join a group willing to accept a rookie who asks a lot of questions.

CCGs? Not really, none are an exact match for D&D. There is a D&D board game but I'm not sure what kind of rules it is using.

Personally I'm not a fan of 4e but then it's just not my style. It IS more simplified than 3e (which may be part of why I'm not a big fan)

3e is the closest to 1st and 2nd ed, just the book keeping mechanics have been streamlined (no more THAC0 tables), and a few other basic changes (no more level caps, anybody can have 3 classes, etc)

[Mutazoia]

**************************EDIT******************** ************ Sorry for the double post...server error and all that

[DeltaEmil]

3.5 Supplements: There is alot of stuff out there, as far as the official WTC goes, it all seems to be from the same template; new classes, epic stuff new feats and spells, oh and by the way, here is enough fluff so that you can claim to have a backstory. The early edition supplements seemed to have more story and flavor. (Am I really getting so old that I am starting to consider fluff to be an important element of the game?)The reason is of course that WotC did find out that selling books with spells, rules, prestige classes and all that 'crunchy' stuff makes more money than books only about 'fluffy' stuff.
Instead of only getting money from GMs, they also get money from players.

TSR on the other hand concentrated only on selling 'fluff' material, and went bankrupt. Of course, they also had a management that hated D&D, so yeah...

[McSmack]

Yeah 4th edition is a lot more simplistic and a lot more intuitive in some ways. It's also what a lot of the young people are playing now-a-days. There are some elements that are very similar to modern MMO's.

Personally I didn't like it. I felt that it was TOO simplistic and had watered down a lot of the things I liked about 3.5, but then that's probably what's making me one of the old guys now.

Another option you might look into is Pathfinder. It's basically an updated version of 3.5 through a publisher called Paizo. It uses d20, and has the look and feel of 3.5, but with a simplified skill list and more balanced classes.
One of the things I find appealing about it is that there isn't a whole lot published for it yet. You can purchase a lot of the books as pdf's from their website for around $10 each, ordering a hardback book from them gets you an automatic pdf of it. Including the books on gamemastering there's maybe a dozen books offered. It's good stuff IMO.

[Mutazoia]

Yeah 4th edition is a lot more simplistic and a lot more intuitive in some ways. It's also what a lot of the young people are playing now-a-days. There are some elements that are very similar to modern MMO's.

HAH! Be careful...I made a comment like that and my thread got shut down lol

[Doc Roc]

HAH! Be careful...I made a comment like that and my thread got shut down lol

You were.... a bit vociferous, dudeman, and indicated what I would consider a lack of knowledge regarding the topic combined with a radical opinion.
4e is a pretty cool game in some respects, and does some things very well.

[testpatternmih]

I would also recommend looking at Pathfinder. It did not simplify skills as much as 4e but did a good job chopping down the ones that should have been grouped together and is pretty much compatitable with all 3.5e book.

d20pfsrd.com

cheers mate, enjoy and thanks for serving. :)

*psst should we tell him about gestalt yet???*

[Doc Roc]

I would also recommend looking at Pathfinder. It did not simplify skills as much as 4e but did a good job chopping down the ones that should have been grouped together and is pretty much compatitable with all 3.5e book.

d20pfsrd.com

cheers mate, enjoy and thanks for serving. :)

*psst should we tell him about gestalt yet???*

The first rule of gestalt club is I'll club you if you talk about gestalt.
The second rule of gestalt club is that I'll club you if you talk about gestalt.
The third rule is that this means you will get clubbed twice.

[TroubleBrewing]

*psst should we tell him about gestalt yet???*

No. Let's leave UA out of this entirely, if at all possible.

And ToM.

And Incarnum.

[Mutazoia]

You were.... a bit vociferous, dudeman, and indicated what I would consider a lack of knowledge regarding the topic combined with a radical opinion.
4e is a pretty cool game in some respects, and does some things very well.

Well I think my post was mis-understood, and that was my fault, should have been clearer. But that's neither here or there. :smallbiggrin:

[Gavinfoxx]

There are a few different groups doing a sort of kind of "3.75" thing. One of them is Paizo's Pathfinder, another is Bad Axe Games's Trailblazer, and another is Crafty Games's FantasyCraft. Each takes a different view of how much to change, what parts need balance, what needs streamlining, etc. Paizo seems to be the most conservative "change the least" of the options, and as such, doesn't fix many of 3.5e's crazy imbalances (which mostly stem from magic being better than notmagic)... but I'm rambling. You should really check out 4e.... but 3.5e MIGHT be cheaper, if only because you have access to great resources like www.d20srd.org.

[Jopustopin]

If I was starting over with 3.5 and I didn't know that much about the setting. I would buy only 5 books. This, I consider, the "starting package"

Monsters Manual
Dungeon Masters Guide
Player's Handbook
Tome of Battle
Eberron Campaign Setting

Essentially without the tome of battle you cannot play a non-magic using class that's cool. Eberron is a high magic AND low powered game which I find awesome.

But that's how I like my D&D. I think asking what you should buy and you'll find many different opinions.

Also I don't think you really have to have any particular knowledge about collectible card games in order to play and understand d&d.

[Techsmart]

What is a good starting package for someone who wants to learn the game as they go?
and
Is there any old ccg stuff I can pick up to become culturally literate to today's players that ties into the same fantasy setting?

(I'm assuming you mean the class starting packages) If there's someone who does know how things work, the barbarian one is a pretty simple class that pretty much builds itself. Power attack, cleave, great cleave... first couple levels are already planned out. If everyone is learning, get a group with traditional roles, cleric doing healing, wizard blasting, fighter smashing, rogue...
any CCG's? not really. Best thing I could recommend is Munchkin, but that won't do too much for ya.
Also, I support Pathfinder as well. I'm not even going to mention balance (it didn't do too much for balance, but I think it has more flavor to the classes), but I do like the alternative class features. You wanna be a ninja? Well, Instead of getting another book for an entirely new class, it just tweaks a similar class (rogue, in this case) so be more flavorfully accurate to your role. Also, pathfinder can easilly be done with 2 books (core rules and bestiary).

[Jopustopin]

Oh here is a guide to free d&d

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1109.0

[bruthaflex]

Wow! I make this post before a 3 hour class and voila! A lot of useful info!

From what I have seen of 4.0, the changes were too extreme for my taste. I think it's cool that the game is more playable for MMO'ers, but I think 3.5 is tweakable to my tastes and limitations. I forgot to ask questions about pathfinder, but several of you were right on top of it. I will probably see if I can pick up the core somewhere too check out.

I am glad to hear that everyone here is not steeped in the ccg thing, I guess any of that flavor in the game is probably due to the punlisher.

I think I will switch my character to a barbarian, I can slowly learn about my dm's campaign through a slow thinker, and my party won't be hitting me up for sage advice.

This forum rocks!

[Doc Roc]

Wow! I make this post before a 3 hour class and voila! A lot of useful info!

From what I have seen of 4.0, the changes were too extreme for my taste. I think it's cool that the game is more playable for MMO'ers, but I think 3.5 is tweakable to my tastes and limitations. I forgot to ask questions about pathfinder, but several of you were right on top of it. I will probably see if I can pick up the core somewhere too check out.

I am glad to hear that everyone here is not steeped in the ccg thing, I guess any of that flavor in the game is probably due to the punlisher.

I think I will switch my character to a barbarian, I can slowly learn about my dm's campaign through a slow thinker, and my party won't be hitting me up for sage advice.

This forum rocks!

It's... really not very MMO-like, speaking as someone who's punched 2000+ hours in MMOs. That's a criticism leveled primarily by people who've only heard things about the game. I did initially buy into it, but... :: shrugs :: it's a pretty big set of breaks in tradition, but it's not actually a bad game. Rather solid, really, but intermittently uninspired in weird ways.

[Lateral]

I would agree with Doc Roc; 4e's just a wholly different game. Really, the differences between 3.5 and 4e are larger than 3.5 and, say, GURPS. 4e is, in my opinion, more tactical and less roleplayable than 3.5. (Also more balanced, but that's a tale for another thread.)

[TroubleBrewing]

Yeah. If you're into games like Final Fantasy Tactics or Tactics Ogre, 4e is sort of perfect. Turn-based, grid-set combat with a flavorful group of characters with varied abilities, strengths, and relevant items? Yes, please.

[bruthaflex]

Thanks for the balanced reviews of 4.0. I am more of a roleplayer, but I do enjoy skirmish based mini games, I might check out 4.0 and treat as a different game.

[TroubleBrewing]

I might check out 4.0 and treat as a different game.

That's my usual approach. I ask my gaming group if they want me to DM 4e or D&D. :smalltongue:

[Telonius]

I am looking for: links to any 3.5 and 2e stuff that might help. Especially wordbuilding background stuff.

I thought it would be nice to make the spells into cards for easy reference,
any ideas on streamlining stuff or making it easier to use would be great.

The "default" D&D setting, Greyhawk, didn't really get much love and attention after 2e. A typical campaign will assume you're in a generic high-fantasy setting, with the DM free to fill in whatever details. The PHB gives a list of gods, but they're proprietary to WotC so you have to hunt a bit to find any game-mechanics information for it online. (You can piece it together from official WotC sources, but it's tough to do if you don't already know what you're looking for). Generic setting also assumes the existence of the planes described in the SRD. The DMG has some more information and suggestions about worldbuilding, but if you were able to do it in 1e you shouldn't have much trouble in 3.5.

There are other specific settings: Faerun and Eberron are the most popular. Faerun is more high-fantasy. Eberron is typically edgier and more magitech/steampunk-ish, and has Warforged and dinosaur-riding Halflings.

Spell cards are really nice, but they're usually two different types. First is for for the spellcasters to keep track of how many times they've casted in a day, the second is for everybody else to keep track of which effects are currently active (so you don't forget that +2 the Cleric gave you three rounds ago). For that type, just take a notecard, write the effect on it, fold it in half, and stand it up when the spell is active. My group uses the second type very often. Especially as you get up into higher levels and have more spells active, it's an incredible time-saver.


BTW: I am broke and cannot afford my game habit, I usually buy my books second hand, and try to use the srd, and any other free stuff I can find. I noticed that alot of 2e stuff is pretty cheap on ebay.

WotC's website does still have some free 3.5 materials available (Master of Masks (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20070105a&page=3) PrC, Knight (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20060523a)class).

dandwiki (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Main_Page) also has a bunch, particularly Feats. Note: BEWARE of some of the material there. The site is kind of notorious for making it hard to tell what's official and what's homebrew. Most of the homebrew is horribly balanced, many of the class builds don't actually work (wouldn't qualify for that feat at that level), etc. Basically, they've got real information and they've got bilge; make sure you verify the difference before putting it in your game.



What is a good starting package for someone who wants to learn the game as they go?


This one kind of goes against the "broke" problem, but personally I've found the Shackled City adventure path from Paizo to be a great teaching device. It takes you through a whole adventure, levels 1-20. The bad guys are appropriately powerful to a group of new players, and I've found that building characters from the ground up can really teach people how to do it. Just checked Paizo's website, and they're listing it for $30. (Looks like they're running a discount; it usually sells for more than that, used).

[Particle_Man]

I am looking for: links to any 3.5 and 2e stuff that might help. Especially wordbuilding background stuff.

For free, eh?

First, the "srd d20" (just google the phrase) gives you the "core" 3.5 rules for free, but in addition also give you balanced rules for psionics (you are coming from 1e so I wanted to emphasize the "Balanced" part -- don't be afraid!), optional rules, and some divine and epic rules (which have some useful domains and non-divine, non-epic feats, even if you don't use the divine and epic rules - also, the psionics rules have some useful non-psionic feats -- just an oddity of the system).

Second, Expeditious Retreat Press published "A Magical Medieval Society" which is very good. But for your purposes, they give away, for free, one chapter on cities:

Google "expeditious retreat press a magical medieval city" and it is about the 2nd link down, as a pdf.

[ThunderCat]

I forgot to ask questions about pathfinder, but several of you were right on top of it. I will probably see if I can pick up the core somewhere too check out.Try the Pathfinder SRD to get a sense of it.

[Gullintanni]

The "default" D&D setting, Greyhawk, didn't really get much love and attention after 2e.

While it didn't have tons of new content, Living Greyhawk is about as much love as I think a setting can get.

[Cartigan]

It is very hard to role-play being an expert in alchemy, architecture, history or anything else.
...What?


I think that the game could benefit from a 0-level start.
How would that remotely fix the "problem." You, the player, are not going to suddenly know about alchemy because your game held a different starting point for the character.

Just play Pathfinder. The base rule set and world setting are inherently intertwined - so there's your fluff. It simplifies some stuff from 3.5. And the rest is equally absurd and complicated (and lorded over with an iron fist). You'll love it.

[Telonius]

I am impressed at the level of detail, but as a new player, investing 20-25 points in 50 or so different skills is daunting.
I think that the game could benefit from a 0-level start. It is very hard to role-play being an expert in alchemy, architecture, history or anything else.

I think first level players start out with two much info. This probably doesn't bother you experts as much. I also wonder if most current players are conditioned to the MTG mechanics, and are used to playing games with a 60 card deck.

Missed this part. At level 1, nobody's really an expert in anything. Not even an Expert is really an expert. Check out the DC's of some of those Knowledge skills. Four ranks is probably the equivalent of taking two years' worth of college courses on a subject. You know more than the average person, but not too much more than that. Knowledge skills are Trained Only. That means, if you don't have a rank in it, you can't even attempt that kind of a check. Not all classes have Knowledge as a class skill, either; the most they're going to get is +2 from cross-class skill ranks. There are really only three classes that would typically have 20-25 skill points to spend at level 1: Wizard, Bard, and Rogue. These are the brainy guys (Wizards) and the people who are expected to know a little of everything (Bard and Rogue). In other words, people who would reasonably know a lot of stuff.

As for the cards: I've been gaming a bit over 10 years now, and neither I nor anyone I've played with has ever played MTG. No interest in it, no money for it, and time spent doing that is time not spent playing D&D.

[Lhurgyof]

First, I am thankful to all of you who contribute to the various rpg forums that i have lurked about the last year.

I am returning to the game after a long hiatus. I played 1e in the eighties while in high school, and I played other genres of rpgs in the '90's while in the navy.


My 12 year old son and I have been playing console rpg's like Oblivion, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect. I started to get bored with scripted AI, and I started to research pen and paper games again. I have snooped through various forums and websites, picked up some books, dnd 1e, 2e, and recently some 3.5 stuff.

In my 1e experience, we have always used the rules as guidelines, because they were hard for me to follow.

The 2e stuff looks like its been reorganized, but I don't like the fact that it's been censored. I do like the flavor of the 1e and 2e supplements, ie The complete Wizards Handbook, etc. they provide alot of background info for character back stories.

My son and I were invited to a 3.5e campaign, and I was eager to learn the game while playing, with hopes of starting my own campaign for my son and his friends, and any of my gamer buddies that might be interested.

I thought I would post my impressions here and get some feedback.

Organization: I like the way the rules are organized, I can find what i am looking for relatively quickly.

Mechanics: I like the feel of the d20 system, and like the dc's. I am suprised that many of the character sheets I have seen are as convoluted as ever. They have the same layout as the cumbersome sheets I used in the '80's.
I thought it would be cool to have a page that summarizes a characters main abilities and usable skills or spells. The entirety of the skills/feats/spells is overwhelming! I am impressed at the level of detail, but as a new player, investing 20-25 points in 50 or so different skills is daunting.
I think that the game could benefit from a 0-level start. It is very hard to role-play being an expert in alchemy, architecture, history or anything else.

I think first level players start out with two much info. This probably doesn't bother you experts as much. I also wonder if most current players are conditioned to the MTG mechanics, and are used to playing games with a 60 card deck.

3.5 Supplements: There is alot of stuff out there, as far as the official WTC goes, it all seems to be from the same template; new classes, epic stuff new feats and spells, oh and by the way, here is enough fluff so that you can claim to have a backstory. The early edition supplements seemed to have more story and flavor. (Am I really getting so old that I am starting to consider fluff to be an important element of the game?)

If you read this post and got to my questions, God bless you!

I am looking for: links to any 3.5 and 2e stuff that might help. Especially wordbuilding background stuff.

I thought it would be nice to make the spells into cards for easy reference,
any ideas on streamlining stuff or making it easier to use would be great.

BTW: I am broke and cannot afford my game habit, I usually buy my books second hand, and try to use the srd, and any other free stuff I can find. I noticed that alot of 2e stuff is pretty cheap on ebay.

And fro you guys that think the old guy just needs to quit complaining and adjust, I have 2 questions:

What is a good starting package for someone who wants to learn the game as they go?
and
Is there any old ccg stuff I can pick up to become culturally literate to today's players that ties into the same fantasy setting?

Thanks for your ear fellas.

Bruthaflex

Well, Bruthaflex, I do have some tools for you:
http://donjon.bin.sh/
Donjon has some tools for generating worlds, names, dungeons, loot, initiative and power attack trackers, etc.

I see you are also familiar with the SRD, so that helps.

On the ways of fluff, it has decreased over time. It is (from my reading at least), even worse in 4e. But that's just my opinion, you may want to at least peek into it.

[DeltaEmil]

In all actuality, all books in 3rd and 4th edition have good 'fluff' (good as in, there is lots of information that can be used for gameplay - if you particularly like the stuff is another question - I for example detest everything about the Forgotten Realms, since the very first days to the latest incarnation).
They also come with 'crunch'.
There are almost no books focusing only on 'fluff', which should be understandable, as that doesn't make enough money.

[Grommen]

Ho dar fellow old guy! :smallbiggrin: Here is my two copper on the subject.

2nd edition D&D. Not so bad. It's very close to what the end of 1st edition looked like with Unearthed Arcana, and the survival guides. Yes they made the game child friendly cause as the time parents organizations were crawling up TSR's a..... Well you know. Just look in the monster manual you'll figure out what a demon and a devil are. Rogues are still thieves, and anyone can be an assassin.

I prefer the new Pathfinder system to any of the modern systems. Wile I'm currently running a 2nd edition D&D campaign (cause that was what all us old peoples clung too) I really do like Pathfinder. Now as people have said it really is the child of 3rd edition D20 D&D. Granted it's a child on Riddlin and Steroids. That does not make it bad. It just is. The new games have evolved to mirror what computer games have become, more complex and tweek happy. Just because the D20 games are easer than ever to abuse, does not mean you have to allow it. As with most things...Moderation is in order.

However don't panic! You can start out at 1st level, and even if you don't get it right who cares. The level of detail is daunting at first but, it's just you and the kid. If you don't know...Fall back on making it up just like you did with 1st ed. It's still D&D my friend, and your the DM. Your word is law after all.

World Building. Pazio (who makes Pathfinder) has one of the most colorful, well detailed game worlds out their. And all their stuff is 10 buck PDF's and aside from their new world book ($50 bones crammed with pure goodness) all their other books are $20 and under to actually purchase a physical copy. And their world is great. It has been written to be their own but infinitely familiar to us old schoolers. It's packed full of demons, devils, drow, undead, spooky villains, colorful heros. The gods are some of the most ,hym, interesting I've seen. They are more the greek type who take a much more active role in their world.

The frogotten realms is still out their two, and a wealth of stuff exists. And as Wizards of the Coast has abandoned 3.5 and all things related and thussly wrecked their game worlds. I don't feel bad finding free stuff online for it. :smallbiggrin:

You can also re-purpose any older material (1st and 2nd) that you might have. Most of it was fluff anyhow so you just have to make "King X" with 3.5 stats. After a few weeks of gaming it's not that bad to do.

Far as a good starting point for adventure I would suggest one of two things. If you go with 3.5 or Pathfinder.

GOODMEN games adventures. These are 1st edition adventures that use 3.5 rules. Pathfinder is compatible with the game so you really don't need to alter anything. These adventures are the classic "Kick in the door, slay the monster, take it's loot!" adventures. Dungeon Crawl Classics #29 "The adventure Begins" is a hard cover book just stuffed full of 1st level adventures. I did the "Hive of Villainy" and 2 years latter people are still cracking jokes. Good old school stuff.

On a more modern side, Pathfinder #13 "Shadow in the Sky" will introduce you and the players to Riddleport. A wonderful hive of scum and villainy. It's a small pirate town on the edge of No and whear, full of people that need a good whacking. It's the beginning adventure of a six part series hell bent on blowing up the Pathfinder world. The first adventure can be played alone and was pretty awesome. Ya got gambling, betrail, Pirates, and an Imp. heck that is just the first encounter. Whooot!

And lastly.. You don't need all the splat books. Littearly you can play for years with the 3.5 Players Hand book, DMG, and Moster Manual, and a bucket load of adventures. Don't worry about figuring out experience. The splat books add flavor and new stuff. I have them all, and like them. But they are not required. So if those 3 books are all you can get a hold of. Go for it. It's still D&D.

[Greenish]

Speaking of worldbuilding and background, most of the books are purposefully rather vague and non-specific on the setting details, for they're meant to be generic enough to be incorporable in many different settings. If you want official material more grounded to an actual coherent setting, I suggest looking at the setting specific books.

dandwiki (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Main_Page) also has a bunch, particularly Feats.I recommend avoiding said website, which suffers greatly from Sturgeon's Law, in addition to failing to differentiate between random bits of homebrew and actual rules.

[TroubleBrewing]

Obligatory link explaining the aforementioned Law, which, incidentally, has nothing to do with fish. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law)

[Greenish]

Obligatory link explaining the aforementioned Law, which, incidentally, has nothing to do with fish. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ptitle3tinj4tz)Fixed that for you. :smallwink:

[Gullintanni]

...What?
How would that remotely fix the "problem." You, the player, are not going to suddenly know about alchemy because your game held a different starting point for the character.

Just play Pathfinder. The base rule set and world setting are inherently intertwined - so there's your fluff. It simplifies some stuff from 3.5. And the rest is equally absurd and complicated (and lorded over with an iron fist). You'll love it.

The level 0 start is a holdover from AD&D. Level 0 characters were essentially just untrained Fighters. He's, if I'm interpreting correctly, asserting that non-adventuring professions are best encompassed by Level 0 characters. A Level 0 would have no class features, and essentially represents a commoner who has basic training and maybe some professional skills...in the example given, Alchemy.

I think it would be more useful to point the OP to the NPC classes found in the 3.5 DMG. See the Expert, Commoner, Aristocrat, Adept and Warrior classes. The NPC classes are specifically handicapped relative to their PC cousins, in order to represent progressions in different aspects of every day life, such that one might be a level 4 Expert, while still remaining less competent than say, a level 2 Rogue.

For the most part, Level 0 of AD&D has been replaced in function by NPC class progressions.

[Gavinfoxx]

The level 0 start is a holdover from AD&D. Level 0 characters were essentially just untrained Fighters. He's, if I'm interpreting correctly, asserting that non-adventuring professions are best encompassed by Level 0 characters. A Level 0 would have no class features, and essentially represents a commoner who has basic training and maybe some professional skills...in the example given, Alchemy.

I think it would be more useful to point the OP to the NPC classes found in the 3.5 DMG. See the Expert, Commoner, Aristocrat, Adept and Warrior classes.

Also I think the gestalt rules, maybe?

Like a Bard would have their first level be a gestalt Bard//Aristocrat, with the Aristocrat as their 'before adventuring' option, and Bard being added on top when they start adventuring, and a Rogue would have their first level be a Rogue//Expert, and a Paladin would have their first level be Paladin//Warrior, maybe? And Cleric and Druid would be Adept? Wizard or sorcerer would be Magewright, but I'm not sure he has the book that has that...

[Gullintanni]

Also I think the gestalt rules, maybe?

Like a Bard would have their first level be a gestalt Bard//Aristocrat, with the Aristocrat as their 'before adventuring' option, and Bard being added on top when they start adventuring, and a Rogue would have their first level be a Rogue//Expert, and a Paladin would have their first level be Paladin//Warrior, maybe? And Cleric and Druid would be Adept? Wizard or sorcerer would be Magewright, but I'm not sure he has the book that has that...

Sure, the Gestalt rules could easily be used to fill that niche, arguably to better effect than the existing NPC class rules...but given that the OP is a newcomer to 3.5, Gestalt is probably a bit on the 'needlessly complex' side of things.

[akma]

3.5 Supplements: There is alot of stuff out there, as far as the official WTC goes, it all seems to be from the same template; new classes, epic stuff new feats and spells, oh and by the way, here is enough fluff so that you can claim to have a backstory. The early edition supplements seemed to have more story and flavor. (Am I really getting so old that I am starting to consider fluff to be an important element of the game?)

Not that I bought any gaming books or supplements recently, but I would prefer to buy a book of pure crunch then a book of pure fluff.
Fluff is generally the easy part, the crunch is the hard part. I find it especially tedious with monsters. It`s much easier to imagine a monster then to build it. Also, I enjoy fluffing but don`t enjoy crunching, although sometimes the crunching process inspires me.
Crunching becomes longer the higher powered the thing you want to homebrew is, so it`s especially tedious when it comes to homebrewing epic stuff.



I am looking for: links to any 3.5 and 2e stuff that might help. Especially wordbuilding background stuff.


There are a lot of world building advice and guides floating around. Once you have a solid idea, you could start a thread in the worldbuilding forum (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=57) and get specific help and feedback. If you don`t got a solid idea, I would still like to read it, but in this thread.

[Lateral]

I haven't played Pathfinder, so I can't really give much feedback on that, but I do know that it's very expensive and has relatively few splatbooks compared to 3.5. I know people who play core Pathfinder, but also use rules from 3.5 and Pathfinder supplements, and they said it makes the best of both worlds. I dunno. The two are pretty much compatible, so that's nice.

[Cartigan]

I haven't played Pathfinder, so I can't really give much feedback on that, but I do know that it's very expensive
Compared to what?


and has relatively few splatbooks compared to 3.5.
The relevance of that is whether or not you are judging "deluge of classes, feats, spells, and items" as a benefit or a negative. Probably the latter if you are new to 3.5.

[Greenish]

Compared to what?Crack? (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CrackIsCheaper)

[Lateral]

Compared to most other games, including D&D. Most D&D books are dirt cheap nowadays (except ones like the core rulebooks and ToB, which are INSANELY expensive, but core can be replaced for the most part by the SRD and the Warblade's playable without owning ToB), and the PF books are like 30 dollars each. Not to mention that D&D has a lot of stuff online, too.

[McSmack]

I haven't played Pathfinder, so I can't really give much feedback on that, but I do know that it's very expensive and has relatively few splatbooks compared to 3.5.

Yeah the core book at least was quite expensive. I think I payed $45 for mine. Of couse it weighed in at about 600 pages if I recall, and had pretty much all the material from the Player's Handbook and DMG that you'd need to run a game. The Advanced Player's Guide was about the same or slightly cheaper and had about the same amount of crunch as any three splat books put together.

Also Paizo, from what I've seen, puts significantly more work into playtesting their products. In any given 3.5 splatbook, I'd find maybe 10% of the content to be interesting/appealing. With Pathfinder that hovers around the 90%. Almost all of the content is good and works synergizes with other books.

[Cartigan]

Compared to most other games, including D&D. Most D&D books are dirt cheap nowadays (excepting ones like the core rulebooks and ToB),
Except it isn't. The Pathfinder Core Rulebook is a combination of the PHB and DMG and is ~$30. The 3.5 PHB and 3.5 DMG are out of print, unsupported, and still running at least $30 each. The original 4e PHB and DMG are each ~$20.

[Doc Roc]

Except it isn't. The Pathfinder Core Rulebook is a combination of the PHB and DMG and is ~$30. The 3.5 PHB and 3.5 DMG are out of print, unsupported, and still running at least $30 each. The original 4e PHB and DMG are each ~$20.

Absolutely true, except that I could get Savage Worlds for a tenner, OSRIC is dirt cheap, M&M is considerably less expensive, and Pathfinder is a mess. A lovable mess, but a mess.

[Lateral]

Well, yeah. I did say that the PHB and DMG are expensive. Being out of print makes them rarer, and lots of people still play 3.5, so the price goes up. Basic economic theory, wot. Think about what the price of the PF core book will be once it's been out of print for three years.

[Cartigan]

Absolutely true, except that I could get Savage Worlds for a tenner, OSRIC is dirt cheap, M&M is considerably less expensive, and Pathfinder is a mess. A lovable mess, but a mess.

Of course, where are you going to get any of those and what do they contain?

[Doc Roc]

Of course, where are you going to get any of those and what do they contain?

...My.... Local... Game store? Amazon?

Whole games?

What is this I do not even what.

[bruthaflex]

I am glad to see that this is a very active and divergent group!

The 0-level start thing that I envisioned was probably similar to what you guys call "gestault"?
My idea is that you start with extraordinary abilities, as a raw recruit. I don't no if any of you guys played traveller, they had a character training system that too you through university, apprenticeships, military, piracy, street gangs, or whatever.

I know to some of you that 4 levels of skill does not seem overwhelming, its probably ok in a field like swimming, rope use, or riding, but when I have to role play giving info to characters, I think it would have a more authentic feel if I was operating the character as I chose the skills, rather than just picking them outright and comming up with a reason why I know it. I could invest real time in researching material, at least to inform my role play. as a has-been community thespian, I am big into the motivations and methods of acting.

As far as the world goes, I am interested in the logical consistancy of the existance. I am cool with high or low magic, but things should appear to make some sense. I probably lean towards midevial fantasy, with a disinterested pantheon of gods. The pathfinder stuff sounds like it leans this way.

I do not mind complex rules, I just have a narrow focus and a short attention span. It is hard to know where to start sometimes. I work better in situartions where my options are limmited at first, and then expand later.

I have: The d20 srd, phb 3.5, dmg 3.5
I have a sample of the pathfinder core.
I will check out the grayhawk suff, and the free campaigns and adventures suggested here.
I like the index card for spells, and then folding the card to stand-when-in effect trick.

I will take some of the older 1e nd 2e for flavor and fluff, but I do appreciate the "crunch" of d20. Especially for initiative! I admit that the crunch is the heart of a rules system, I am just a big picture kind of guy.

I still want to find or make a character sheet that I can use on my laptop for numbercrunching, with a printout that maybe I can laminate to use dry erase or something for changing hp and bonuses on the fly.

I also need to figure out how to effectively use my puter a an aid during playing or dming. I haven't seen it moddled effectively yet.

I bet some of you probably have played together online with some kind of conferencing software.

Thanks for all of the info, and the support!

BTW, where do I learn how to cut and past posts for responses?
I may as well develop some cyber-culture literacy while I am here.

[akma]

The 0-level start thing that I envisioned was probably similar to what you guys call "gestault"?

This is gestalt. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/gestaltCharacters.htm) Those variant rules actully make more powerfull and complex (mechanically) characters, I don`t understand the logic of suggesting them as level 0 characters.



I know to some of you that 4 levels of skill does not seem overwhelming, its probably ok in a field like swimming, rope use, or riding, but when I have to role play giving info to characters, I think it would have a more authentic feel if I was operating the character as I chose the skills, rather than just picking them outright and comming up with a reason why I know it. I could invest real time in researching material, at least to inform my role play. as a has-been community thespian, I am big into the motivations and methods of acting.

I don`t realy see 4 skill levels as significant. For exemple, if I made a character with 4 ranks of knowledge (arcane), and be asked for an explanation, I might simply say that my character read a few books on the subject.



BTW, where do I learn how to cut and past posts for responses?
I may as well develop some cyber-culture literacy while I am here.

Look on my post, down right corner. There is the quote option, if you want to quote just me, or the " option, if you want to add this post to the posts you`ll quote when you will click post.

[paddyfool]

There are a few different groups doing a sort of kind of "3.75" thing. One of them is Paizo's Pathfinder, another is Bad Axe Games's Trailblazer, and another is Crafty Games's FantasyCraft. Each takes a different view of how much to change, what parts need balance, what needs streamlining, etc. ...

This is really something of a sidetrack, but I wouldn't describe FantasyCraft as D&D 3.75. It looks like D&D, plays a bit like a Tier 3 D&D party with a large dose of cinematics, but it's fundamentally based on the SpyCraft chassis, and at least as different as one D&D edition typically is from another. Some say it's what they'd have liked 4th ed to have been... but that's a tad too controversial for polite conversation.

[MeeposFire]

It's... really not very MMO-like, speaking as someone who's punched 2000+ hours in MMOs. That's a criticism leveled primarily by people who've only heard things about the game. I did initially buy into it, but... :: shrugs :: it's a pretty big set of breaks in tradition, but it's not actually a bad game. Rather solid, really, but intermittently uninspired in weird ways.

Speaking of this I find it ironic considering 3.5 is the that has a MMO unlike 4e. 4e is always a weird bird when you try to talk about differences between editions since it breaks many old sacred cows but it shares somethings with older editions that 3e doesn't. Hence why the conversations can get so nasty and long winded.

[Veyr]

Also Paizo, from what I've seen, puts significantly more work into playtesting their products
I'm torn between "no, they really don't" and "that's really not saying much".

WotC probably did almost no playtesting at all. Seriously, it probably didn't happen. The Truenamer certainly never got playtested. Paizo probably playtests a little bit, on most of their stuff, sort of.

But the Paizo beta playtest thing was a publicity stunt, no if's, and's, or but's about it. That was a joke and a cruel one. They literally banned people for pointing out optimization shenanigans that their rules allowed. And Paizo Core (I haven't read any of their later stuff) is almost exactly the same as 3.5 Core as far as balance goes (read: unbelievably terrible). Spellcasters still dominate everything, melee still gets shafted left, right, and center. The Paladin is the only class whose Tier changed, most likely. Maybe the Druid, too.

[Doc Roc]

Speaking of this I find it ironic considering 3.5 is the that has a MMO unlike 4e. 4e is always a weird bird when you try to talk about differences between editions since it breaks many old sacred cows but it shares somethings with older editions that 3e doesn't. Hence why the conversations can get so nasty and long winded.

Or ideally just don't happen.

[Eldan]

...My.... Local... Game store?

Doesn't exist. There are none in this country.



Amazon?

Whole games?

What is this I do not even what.

Not on this continent. I could pay 50-60$ shipping cost and import taxes, though. So, yeah.

[MeeposFire]

From what I understand is that part of the problem was that there is a significant subset of 3e players that did not want to significantly change the classes in regards to balance (at least in the ways that matter). Hence why the fighter did not gain anything of real value but they did get some nice toys that make them look better especially to those who don't know their real problems.

For instance if they gave fighters the vital strike feats for free, made bravery apply to all will saves, and gave them 4 skill points per level (maybe add a skill or to the list as well) and they would be so much better.

[Doc Roc]

This is really something of a sidetrack, but I wouldn't describe FantasyCraft as D&D 3.75. It looks like D&D, plays a bit like a Tier 3 D&D party with a large dose of cinematics, but it's fundamentally based on the SpyCraft chassis, and at least as different as one D&D edition typically is from another. Some say it's what they'd have liked 4th ed to have been... but that's a tad too controversial for polite conversation.

Fantasycraft is pretty charming, but I know literally no one who plays it. If someone were to start a PbP with it, I'd be interested.


Doesn't exist. There are none in this country.



Not on this continent. I could pay 50-60$ shipping cost and import taxes, though. So, yeah.

Clonk (http://www.peginc.com/Downloads/SWEX/TD06.pdf)

It's not much but...

[MeeposFire]

Or ideally just don't happen.

I so agree. No arguments of these sorts is so much more fun around these parts. 4e doesn't deserve the crap it gets from many people and 3e deserves a lot of credit for finally breaking the mold and bringing many of the important concepts to the light that helped make 4e (such as the D20 mechanic, powers which are like maneuvers from TOB, and the idea of at will magic).

[Greenish]

I know to some of you that 4 levels of skill does not seem overwhelming, its probably ok in a field like swimming, rope use, or riding, but when I have to role play giving info to characters, I think it would have a more authentic feel if I was operating the character as I chose the skills, rather than just picking them outright and comming up with a reason why I know it. I could invest real time in researching material, at least to inform my role play. as a has-been community thespian, I am big into the motivations and methods of acting.Four ranks isn't much at all, and surely you can find from the backstory of your character a number of skills they could reasonable be adept with.

As far as the world goes, I am interested in the logical consistancy of the existance. I am cool with high or low magic, but things should appear to make some sense. I probably lean towards midevial fantasy, with a disinterested pantheon of gods.Eberron does the internal consistency wonderfully, and there's no proof it's deities are even real. It's more of an renaissance (or even early industrialization) than pure middle ages setting though.

Doesn't exist. There are none in this country.I find that hard to believe. A quick English language google search seems to find at least a couple of gaming stores from Zurich alone.

[paddyfool]

Fantasycraft is pretty charming, but I know literally no one who plays it. If someone were to start a PbP with it, I'd be interested.


I could do a small one-shot here... but I probably shouldn't, until at least June. Your best chance would be crafty games' own pbp forum (http://www.crafty-games.com/forum/index.php?board=9.0), but even there, new games start rarely enough.

[Doc Roc]

I could do a small one-shot here... but I probably shouldn't, until at least June. Your best chance would be crafty games' own pbp forum (http://www.crafty-games.com/forum/index.php?board=9.0), but even there, new games start rarely enough.

This is not uplifting. I'll wait until you can in June. Mark it and remind me.

[LansXero]

Lets see, one of the DMs I met recently does this for his campaigns: You start as whatever you used to be before adventuring (no class skills, and basically a commoner) for the first session, which is usually a very small solo adventure. Then the player sets his goals / motivations / skills in the context of the campaign by roleplaying instead of just assigning them in a sheet, and it feels a bit more organic. It also lets them see if the way they aproach situations really meshes with the character they wanted to play (for example, a run-in, kick the door guy maybe doesnt really wanna play that rogue after all). Thats what I thought of when you mentioned a level 0.

As for some other stuff:
This (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2739526/Dungeons%20and%20Dragons/GamezonePCs.xls) isnt really a sheet, its something I made to keep track of my players' stats and mantain a record every few levels, but I think it came out nicely so perhaps it may help you as well :D

I got these from someone's signature in these forums: http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=17733&it=1 they seem in line with what you were requesting; and as for easy enemy planning and reference these (https://dl-web.dropbox.com/get/Public/TGM_Dragon_Green-9.jpg?w=9fa95ad1) are neat too.

[Grommen]

I am glad to see that this is a very active and divergent group!

The 0-level start thing that I envisioned was probably similar to what you guys call "gestault"?
My idea is that you start with extraordinary abilities, as a raw recruit. I don't no if any of you guys played traveller, they had a character training system that too you through university, apprenticeships, military, piracy, street gangs, or whatever.

I know to some of you that 4 levels of skill does not seem overwhelming, its probably ok in a field like swimming, rope use, or riding, but when I have to role play giving info to characters, I think it would have a more authentic feel if I was operating the character as I chose the skills, rather than just picking them outright and comming up with a reason why I know it. I could invest real time in researching material, at least to inform my role play. as a has-been community thespian, I am big into the motivations and methods of acting.

As far as the world goes, I am interested in the logical consistancy of the existance. I am cool with high or low magic, but things should appear to make some sense. I probably lean towards midevial fantasy, with a disinterested pantheon of gods. The pathfinder stuff sounds like it leans this way.

I do not mind complex rules, I just have a narrow focus and a short attention span. It is hard to know where to start sometimes. I work better in situartions where my options are limmited at first, and then expand later.

I have: The d20 srd, phb 3.5, dmg 3.5
I have a sample of the pathfinder core.
I will check out the grayhawk suff, and the free campaigns and adventures suggested here.
I like the index card for spells, and then folding the card to stand-when-in effect trick.

I will take some of the older 1e nd 2e for flavor and fluff, but I do appreciate the "crunch" of d20. Especially for initiative! I admit that the crunch is the heart of a rules system, I am just a big picture kind of guy.

I still want to find or make a character sheet that I can use on my laptop for numbercrunching, with a printout that maybe I can laminate to use dry erase or something for changing hp and bonuses on the fly.

I also need to figure out how to effectively use my puter a an aid during playing or dming. I haven't seen it moddled effectively yet.

I bet some of you probably have played together online with some kind of conferencing software.

Thanks for all of the info, and the support!

BTW, where do I learn how to cut and past posts for responses?
I may as well develop some cyber-culture literacy while I am here.

Their are several computer programs that allow you to make legal characters. I don't use them cause computers hate me and I can wip up a stat block in Word faster than I can argue with a new program. But my friends swear by them (I swear at them :smallfurious:)

Their are also dice rollers and free map makers, and free campaign editors online. With RpTools you can pretty much make your campaign on the computer, hook it into your LCD at home and play over your table. It's pretty awesome.

I will say this about initiative. Coming from 2nd edition to 3rd and then pathfinder. I absolutely hate using a D20 for initiative. No weapon speeds, no delay for spell casters, etc. The only saving grace is that you can loop the initiative so you just go round and round after the first pass. Having 20 numbers to roll for initiative pretty much takes skill out of the equation. It's just pure luck who goes first. I'm pretty sure the next time I sit down to play D20/Pathfinder I'm going back to 2nd editions initiative and house rule it.

On crunching. D20 games require a bit more work. The lighter you keep your rule books (IE the fewer you use) the better the crunch is. And honestly you don't need your character to be a "1st Warrior / 3rd Servant of the doom/ 5 I'm a god" build. Just say one core class and one prestige. It's all good.

Gestalt, I don't think, is what you want. A gestalt is more like the old Fighter/Mage or Priest/Thief dual classing from 1st and 2nd. They take the best of both classes and toss out the worst. Their insanely powerful builds, and it looks like a bunch more crunch.

The Pathfinder world is more of a early renaissance period. They have the basics of firearms, though not well spread. They have printing presses, and some mechanization. The bergs however don't have this stuff, and remain very barbaric. Some of the gods are hands on, wile some are hands off. I would call it a high magic world, as you can barely cross the street without tripping over a finger wagger. However your mileage may vary.

[paddyfool]

This is not uplifting. I'll wait until you can in June. Mark it and remind me.

Will do. I'll also start advertising it in my sig and see if we get any further interest.