addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscontroller-playcrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupshelp-with-circleimageimagesinstagramFill 1light-bulblinklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1ShapeoutlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonprintShapeShapeShapeShapeImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruserwarningyahoo

Twin Cities Roleplaying Association Message Board TCRA Main Forum › Wanting feedback on a game idea.

Wanting feedback on a game idea.

mark
user 88605722
Minneapolis, MN
Post #: 1
I have a game world that is set up in 1st edition but could be changed over to 3rd because I like it. Which system is easier to get players for?
William C.
user 43358752
Eden Prairie, MN
Post #: 11
The most common campaigns, and the easiest to get off the ground, are 3.5/Pathfinder (think of Pathfinder as 3.75) and 4E. [url]http://www.d20pfsrd.c...­][/url] will show you everything you need for a Pathfinder game (including things like psionics from 3rd party sources).
Troy S.
SkullThrone
Minneapolis, MN
Post #: 28
These days Pathfinder would be the easiest D&D version to convert the campaign setting too. If your familiar with 3rd and don't want to go all the way to Pathfinder (which I agree is about 3.75), then I think Pathfinder players could easily come down to 3rd as well...(But, in my opinion, Pathfinder did fix a few of the major issues with 3rd edition that were missed in the 3.5 rules).

You could always jump to D&D Next as well, there seems to be enough material out there to run a campaign up to 5th level or so...haven't really looked at the latest round of material, they just released some last week.
mark
user 88605722
Minneapolis, MN
Post #: 2
Thanks for the replies but I have a complete world designed using forgotten realms as a base(mostly for maps). It has over 20 years of work into it and can run a lot of story lines from 1st level up to retirement. It is set in 1st edition AD&D but could be changed over to any system. I have a rich background for characters and really encourage role playing. A lot of sessions are set around other activities besides just combat. That being said I find 4th edition to combat orientated to consider being used. Pathfinder is a good system but a few classes that are not basic core classes are a bit overpowered other than that I might just use pathfinder and modify a few classes to fit.
Troy S.
SkullThrone
Minneapolis, MN
Post #: 29
Thanks for the replies but I have a complete world designed using forgotten realms as a base(mostly for maps). It has over 20 years of work into it and can run a lot of story lines from 1st level up to retirement. It is set in 1st edition AD&D but could be changed over to any system. I have a rich background for characters and really encourage role playing. A lot of sessions are set around other activities besides just combat. That being said I find 4th edition to combat orientated to consider being used. Pathfinder is a good system but a few classes that are not basic core classes are a bit overpowered other than that I might just use pathfinder and modify a few classes to fit.

Mark, I hear you...For role-playing "It shouldn't matter"...Its the argument that I've used a lot for other things...but it does matter for attracting players. I totally agree with you that in 4E you really have to fight against the system to role-play, healing is very quick so you have to prevent resting to provide certain challenges (or ramp up battles...which ramps up XP and leveling).

My thinking is I think people prefer Pathfinder, simply because they are familiar with things...they know about what level one should be before certain creatures are attacked, so it helps them weigh the combat to make better decisions for their character.

It also plays in to whether or not to try certain actions, for example: a 1st thief with a bow out becomes engaged in melee with a goblin. If the system is Pathfinder and player is familiar with it, then they know "taking a shot while engaged in melee" is a bad idea, they also know that a thief does not have a BAB of +1 so they can't stow their bow and draw their sword as a free action, so probably the best move for them to do is a 5 foot step and shoot the goblin with their bow.

Players not familiar with the system may end up taking a lot of unnecessary damage, granted the DM or another player would likely guide them, but in a true "Role-Play" event these rules could be ignored for the sake of game play...

I think players feel empowered when they know the system, and they can challenge a DM on things when they feel like its violating some rule (the DM can always ignore these challenges, but always being unfair will likely cause players to find another game). As a DM, I can tell you I hated 4E for that reason, players constantly phasing and teleporting around made the game very annoying to try to just tell a story, without getting into constant debates over how things were functioning.

So, the gist of my reasoning comes down to "knowing the rules" helps players keep their characters alive...The DM can encourage or discourage meta-gaming by how they handle certain situations, but if the players aren't familiar with the DM then simply trusting that they will make the game fun may be too much of a leap of faith to jump into a random game.

I really like rules light systems that are content rich, like Forgotten Realms in 1st edition...but I also like some of the game play changes that have come in later versions, and think really any system can be adopted by a creative group of players, but I'd question why a group would use 4E in a non-combat heavy campaign (or in one that they are trying to focus on RP), the same for a group that wanted a spellcasting heavy The One Ring campaign...If you have to fight against the system, then there is probably a better choice out there.

Savage Worlds seems to do a great job of being "rules light", but finding a campaign setting as rich as some of the Pathfinder adventure paths is a tough one, which I think is what gives Pathfinder its majority following.

I'm willing to continue hammering out this though or debate things further, but I think this gets my point across, maybe a bit long winded.
Steve W.
wilcoxon
Minneapolis, MN
Post #: 71
I think players feel empowered when they know the system, and they can challenge a DM on things when they feel like its violating some rule (the DM can always ignore these challenges, but always being unfair will likely cause players to find another game). As a DM, I can tell you I hated 4E for that reason, players constantly phasing and teleporting around made the game very annoying to try to just tell a story, without getting into constant debates over how things were functioning.

I don't follow your logic here. 4e is much simpler to understand the rules and keep them straight than 3.5/PF (you just have to play it a few times). Also, phasing and teleporting are much more restricted in 4e than in 3.5/PF (before Paragon, there are only a few daily powers that allow teleport of more than a few squares (and a few square teleport is no different than tumbling in 3.5/PF)).

After playing 4e for quite a while, I find it hard to go back to 3.5/PF as the clunkiness of some of the rules (mostly around combat) gets in the way (not to mention the frustration of playing a low-level caster in 3.5 (less so in PF)).

I'd question why a group would use 4E in a non-combat heavy campaign (or in one that they are trying to focus on RP)

That I would agree with to some extent. 4e has many fewer skills than 3.5/PF and how they are resolved tends to feel less fulfilling than other games - skill challenges as defined in the rules detract from RP in some cases, level outstrips training in skills by around Paragon, etc.

Savage Worlds seems to do a great job of being "rules light", but finding a campaign setting as rich as some of the Pathfinder adventure paths is a tough one, which I think is what gives Pathfinder its majority following.

I definitely agree about Savage Worlds. It's a good rules-light system for a lot of settings/genres but the richness of the setting varies greatly.

For a high fantasy setting, I'd also consider using the Arcanis rules. They have their own detailed setting as well but that's not really relevant in this discussion since the original poster has his own. I haven't played much yet but the rules seem to fix a lot of the problems with D&D and give the players more freedom (it's a mostly classless system).

For a slightly grittier fantasy game, I'm a big fan of Metal, Magic, & Lore. It has a lower-magic feel but works great for combat and skill resolution (and allowing role-playing).
Troy S.
SkullThrone
Minneapolis, MN
Post #: 31
Steve, I'm starting another thread as to not hi-jack this one with our debate...See this one for my reply:

http://www.meetup.com...­
Paul O.
user 4986770
Minneapolis, MN
Post #: 27
I would also throw in GURPS, Cortex, and FATE as good systems that encourage role vs roll playing and have a nice set of diverse skills.
Troy S.
SkullThrone
Minneapolis, MN
Post #: 34
I think you should post the content from the email dialog we've had...I think that this do a good summary of what your looking from from the post.

I think essentially your asking "Why does the system matter so much?"...I just see the replies getting away from your intent.

Granted I've had number of off-thread exchanges with you, which is where this post if coming from...and think that if you wanted more specific replies from everyone it might be conducive to share some of the info from these messages.
Manager D.
user 7377737
Minneapolis, MN
Post #: 80
Mark, Since it is already set in 1st edition, why don't you run it in that?

There was a thread a while back regarding player openings in a 2nd edition game, and that game got a number of responses and filled up quick. I think I pm-ed him only a day or two after the post and could not get in!

It sounds like you have put some work into the campaign. A good story and background will draw players...be it AD&D, Pathfinder, 4e or whatever. Run what system you like to do, and you should be able to find some interested participants.

I started my own 2nd edition AD&D game and went from 2 players to 6, then to 12 players, now in two separate groups. There is actually another several that would like to get in that I cant easily accommodate, as I prefer a 4-6 player group (more is a mob.) Two groups is quite enough for me...if I had a co-dm I could fill that group too.

I did not expect what happened to happen, as I thought 2nd edition AD&D was considered passe`. There are a lot of people who like it, and others willing to try it, as I found out.
Powered by mvnForum

Our Sponsors

  • Profantasy

    Buy map-making software that helps pay for the meetup group.

  • Heirs to the Lost World

    An indie RPG by one of our members. Click the pic for info or to buy it.

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy