D&D 1E Goodbye to 4E, new PF campaign in FR 1e

[seregil]

Not long ago, I started my first Pathfinder campaign set in the Basic Dnd setting of Mystara. I needed something different from 4e because, frankly, I did not like it. I kept my 4e camping going and started up a second campaign, this time using PF.

The PF rules and feel finally gave me the push to do what I have been wanting to do for at least a year: kill my 4e campaign and switch to PF for it too.

Therefore, in the new year, I will be starting a new campaign after 2.5 years of 4E. After long reflection, I decided to use Forgotten Realms, but the 1e edition, before FR went berserk and had a demi-god on every street corner.

In this setting, Elminster is just another wizard. Powerful, sure, but that's it. I will then ignore the FR timeline and forge my own.

I got my hands on the FRCS, FR1 Waterdeep and the North and FR5 The Savage Frontier. I went through them, noting any story hook I could find and I am going to try running a sand-box game if I can.

The question has come up about the other books in the PF series. I have all the books, but beyond the Core rulebook for PF, is there any balance issues in the other books?

Advanced Player's guide looks real solid, but advanced race guide has me worried and the Combat / Magic book seem ok.

Anybody have any advice on the use of these books? Is there any spectacular loopholes in the rules that ruin game balance in them?

Thanks!

 

[Alzrius]

Let me see if I get this straight.

You went PF with BD&D, after 2.5 years of 4E, and now to PF with 1E FR, using FR1 and FR5, and want to use the APG, UM, and UC?

IME, they're A-OK, but YMMV.

 

[seregil]

Let me see if I get this straight.

You went PF with BD&D, after 2.5 years of 4E, and now to PF with 1E FR, using FR1 and FR5, and want to use the APG, UM, and UC?

IME, they're A-OK, but YMMV.

Touché!

I work in government IT. Acronyms are a work-place related hazard.

So no balance issues with any of the books expending on the rules in the PF Core rulebook?

Because the DND 3.5 splatbooks were full of powercreep, be it feats, prestige classes or new magic items.

 

[BobROE]

Touché!

I work in government IT. Acronyms are a work-place related hazard.

So no balance issues with any of the books expending on the rules in the PF Core rulebook?

Because the DND 3.5 splatbooks were full of powercreep, be it feats, prestige classes or new magic items.

It's generally not bad, I'd take a close look at the summoner (and it's various archtypes). I think it's a touch on the too powerful side for my liking, though you may not agree.

I think there are some issues with some feats in the two Ultimate Books, so if your players are planning to use them you may want to make sure they're up to snuff. Also check the errata (depending on which printing your on) to make sure you're up to date on any changes the devs have made.

 

[Alzrius]

So no balance issues with any of the books expending on the rules in the PF Core rulebook?

Because the DND 3.5 splatbooks were full of powercreep, be it feats, prestige classes or new magic items.

While I don't think it goes so far as to have balance issues, the APG does introduce some things - mainly the new classes, particularly the summoner - that some think are on the higher end of the power spectrum.

There's also the addition of some, admittedly optional, rules, such as all characters receiving two traits (e.g. two half-feats at character creation) and action points, that can make things slightly ramped up over time.

In regards to the Ultimate Books, I haven't really used them; I'm of the opinion that having so many options is itself a form of power creep, since it's more than I can keep straight. My group, however, is of the opinion that while Ultimate Magic is a pretty good book, Ultimate Combat is somewhat broken and in need of errata.

 

[Blackbrrd]

So no balance issues with any of the books expending on the rules in the PF Core rulebook?

Because the DND 3.5 splatbooks were full of powercreep, be it feats, prestige classes or new magic items.

I am not at all familiar with PF, but I am pretty sure that adding a lot more options will create enough new combinations that some of them will be pretty overpowered. It's just how it is.

The campaigns I have had the most fun with is the ones with quite few options, for instance just the 3.5 PHB and then giving out some freebies if somebody wanted something not really covered by the PHB.

For instance the Wizard (conjurer, with evocation banned) in my party could spontanous cast Summoning spells. Weaker when compared to a straight up wizard, but different and loads of fun to play. No problem casting enough Phantom Steeds for the whole party for instance.

The positive side to just starting with "the basics" is that people spend less time reading rulebooks and more time thinking about character concepts and such. It also reduces the complexity for the DM and allowed me to spend more time on roleplaying aspects of the game, instead of having to twist my mind to create encounters that dent a "superparty".

 

[gamerprinter]

Of the APG, UM and UC, most of it is fairly balanced. As mentioned by others, the Summoner can be a bit OP, and some of the archetypes are more powerful than others - there are weak ones and stronger ones, but nothing really OP.

Some feat trees get out of hand (not too much) like the Crane Wing Style in UC. Still nothing crazy OP, IMO.

Some people consider the Gunslinger, a bit OP, though it takes a special kind of campaign to use guns as weapons. More than likely if you're running Mystara, guns won't really fit, so it should'nt be much of a problem.

Some find the Ninja, more powerful compared to a rogue, which is it's closest counterpart, but the rogue tends to be an underpowered class anyway - I prefer Ninja to Rogue, as far as that goes.

Monks are still underpowered as well. The Qinggong Monk is the best monk archetype, as it the sohei and zen archer monk. Other monk archetypes are underpowered.