Lesser of Two Evils: Pathfinder or 5e?

[SubversionArts]

Since there are 24 pages currently in the thread about why 5e is dead, and 226(!) pages of how Pathfinder is still bad, but I'm still edition shopping for a decent TTFRPG system (and the Earthdawn new edition kickstarter isn't exactly inspiring me with confidence), I thought I'd check the collective wisdom of the Den to see what people thought was the least bad system between 5e and Pathfinder.

I don't have the inclination to buy and read through both systems to parse out which might work for me, but I thought it might be the kind of task that people here might take up.

For a little background, I dipped out of RPG's around the time of the beginning of 3rd edition, but I've got friends who have stayed in it throughout, and I occasionally get tidbits from the changes in D&D while I was away. And after a reasonably successful reentry into Shadowrun, I'm ready to start looking around for a good fantasy role-playing system.

[Grek]

What do your friends play?

[SubversionArts]

Mostly non-fantasy games. This is a long-term future idea, slash, figuring out what I'm looking for in a game I'd want to play.

[Krusk]

Why is 3.x off the table? To play pathfinder you have to learn 3.x anyway. Pathfinder is just 3.x through a shit smeared lense. Just go 3.x or better yet, 3.x + select house rules to fix some bad parts.

If i had to pick from those two id say pf.

[Hicks]

3.0 and 3.5 have a system reference document, both are available free and online. While 3.0 is the better game, 3.5's SRD has a hypertext version. I'm told that Pathfinder also has an online SRD, but I draw the line at learning another set of houserules after learning the Tomes, which is a better set of houserules that is also available for free online.

[silva]

May I suggest Runequest 6 ?

[Blicero]

Don't listen to anything silva sez, obviously. That crucial bit established, there are a lot of fantasy role-playing games out there. You might want to consider what exactly you want out of it. Saying "PF or 5E, which one" might be skipping a step or two in the decision process.

The main reasons to do Pathfinder are probably its large playerbase and its SRD. It sounds like the first one doesn't matter for you. Lots of the individual mechanics are pretty shoddy, but you can pick and choose until you get something you like.

The Tomes are a pretty comprehensive set of houserules for 3.x on this forum. They are very well-written and fun. Their main issue is that Tome characters can be more powerful than some people are comfortable with. If you have total control over what you play and you want to play a high-powered 3.x game, you should pick Tome over Pathfinder.

The random D&D-like I usually shill for is ACKS (www.autarch.co). It's not quite as high-powered high fantasy as 3.x, and it has a super extensive Logistics and Dragons system built in, which some people dig. ACKS just released its mass combat supplement, which looks pretty neat. The downsides are that you have to pay for it, and it has some annoying grognard-y features.

[RadiantPhoenix]

If you absolutely must pick one or the other, then Pathfinder is, without a doubt, the lesser of the two evils.

But... you should really consider going with Tome instead, or at least 3e D&D.

• Lokathor is working on a complete Tome PDF. (It updated last month, but is still not complete)
• If you want to get started right now, get the 3e core rulebooks (Player's handbook, Dungeonmaster's Guide, and Monster Manual), however it is one gets such things nowadays, then look at the old Tome PDF as a "patch".

[Hiram McDaniels]

@OP:

You HAD to know what the answer was before posting here.

I'm probably the only person on this board who prefers 5E to 3E, but even I have to admit that by any tangible, measurable metric 3E is a better all around game. So I agree with the majority sentiment on the thread: go with 3E; it's free and Paizo doesn't deserve anyone's money. You can even buy reprints of the 3.5 core books if you want a physical copy.

[Prak]

My take-

Dungeons and Dragons 5e/Next/Aw Fuck It Edition: From what I've seen/heard, avoid. Mearls clearly doesn't know what the fuck he wants, and this is leading to a gigantic clusterfuck. Maybe there are some gems worth stealing, but as a whole... well, there is no whole. There's just a bundle of unfinished mechanics, some better than others.

Pathfinder: Hell of a lot more playable than 5e, because it's basically 3e. But, in favour of it over 3e, there are still new books moving through stores, and there are active games of it, while active games of 3e are few and far between (I mean, unless you're in Sacramento, in which case I'd invite you to mine when it can finally start back up).

If you were considering purely these two, Pathfinder wins over 5e any day that a copy of the 5e PHB isn't being bundled with a free fellatio bot.

Moreover, however- you need to ask what kind of game you want, as others have said, and what kind of game your group wants. You may find it valuable to give this a listen if you get a chance, as it talks about getting groups and games together (nsfw warning).

If your group plays mostly non-fantasy stuff, there may be a reason for that. Try to think about what your group gets out of a game, their payouts. Now, I can't imagine anyone would have solely payouts which can only be obtained through non-fantasy gaming, but I suppose it is possible.

I wouldn't usually suggest Runequest, but I wouldn't say it's terrible. It's not the erection giving awesome that Silva seems to consider it, but it's interesting, and the system isn't a huge warcrime. Keep in mind that the way you're "supposed" to play it is with this weird mythic reality that's a drug-fueled vague approximation of how the drug fueled spiritualists of ancient cultures viewed the world. I could only speak to Mongoose's two versions (RQ2 is the better of the two). It could be worth a play if it looks interesting.

3e is venerable, and decent, especially if house-ruled, but it's somewhat like fondling a corpse at this point.

Mutants and Masterminds has flaws but it's damned flexible, and fun.

[TarkisFlux]

PF has a fuck load of options and content and advice and all of the other things that come with being an older game from a company that likes splats. Whether this is good or not depends on how much reading you want to do. It has more rules for more things, so you spend time looking things up instead of making things up early in the learning process.

5e is by far the simpler game, useful if you don't want to dive through all the options and internet advice of an older and more rules heavy game. The basic rules are free, and if you don't care about just making up expansion options as needed / desired then you can make due with those. It requires more mind caulk and making shit up, so you spend time making shit up instead of looking in the book. If you're not used to making things up or not used to the system, this will probably turn out non-optimally for a while, if not actually badly. If you have sufficient experience with 2e (unclear from your OP) you can probably apply a lot of the same bullshitting technique to it and have something playable / fun for your group. Just be willing to revisit rulings and adjust them as needed to tune your group's enjoyment.

They're both better at the lower ends of things though. I don't know that I would take either game past level 10 without really understanding what you should expect up there and taking steps to mitigate the weirdness / set group expectations.

[SubversionArts]

I appreciate the advice, everyone!

No, 3.x isn't off the table, because obviously isn't PF considered 3.75? My main consideration is physical books. I love the concept of hyperlinked gaming resources...I mean damn, when I was playing 2E, pdf books were cutting edge and extremely rare. I would have loved to have all my books in pdf form. Maybe if I had a huge tablet that could display a page at full size, that would be fantastic, but flipping through pages and making your own connections between the material is also valueable. A combination of a physical copy, a searchable pdf, and an SRD would be outstanding.

It sounds like the general inclination of this board is using 3E + house rules/Tome. I can investigate that pretty easily since I my housemate has a large library of 3E stuff.

Like I mentioned in an earlier reply, this is just the early research. I wouldn't even know if my current group(s) of players would be into a fantasy rpg. I don't even know if this would be something I'd be running, or finding to play in.

[Avoraciopoctules]

I feel that pathfinder is superior to 3.5 in aggregate, though there are certainly some problems. The main reason is that Paizo puts way more of their content into the SRD. If I want to find a monster, I can check almost all of them on this page http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/bestia ... ters-by-cr

Casters are even more ridiculous than before, and noncasters need to learn different tricks, but I don't really think that's a huge difference compared to other 3.x versions.

[TheFlatline]

Isn't the DMG not even out yet for 5e?

I'd consider it a non-starter until the three core books are out in print.

[Silent Wayfarer]

I would pick PF over 5e, mainly because the material is far more accessible than 5e (their SRD covers damn near everything that's ever been published for it) and it's closer in execution to 3.x, which I like.

[Josh_Kablack]

. Maybe if I had a huge tablet that could display a page at full size.

Those are getting down to reasonable prices lately:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 4P01ZS5441

[TarkisFlux]

Isn't the DMG not even out yet for 5e?

I'd consider it a non-starter until the three core books are out in print.

The 5e DMG is out as of the 9th of December.

[Orion]

3E is an impossibly difficult sell in 2014. You simply cannot get people to play it unless they are already close friends.

[Emerald]

3E is an impossibly difficult sell in 2014. You simply cannot get people to play it unless they are already close friends.

In your area, perhaps, but at least where I am around 70% of the Meetup.com/Reddit/game store/etc. looking-for-group ads are looking for 3e, with the rest being PF and non-d20 games (mostly Shadowrun and Vampire), and I managed to find a group of 7 complete strangers with which to start up a 3e game around March of this year when I first moved to the area. I'm starting to see 5e game ads popping up now, but 3e is still going strong.

[radthemad4]

You don't really have to choose between 3.5, PF and Tome. I'd recommend learning PF first as that gives you the most free content (stick to casters (partial casters can be pretty okay) and monsters). Once you're somewhat comfortable, look up conversion between that and 3.5. Then you'll be able to use anything from 3.5 or Tome. 3.5 stuff is somewhat annoying to access due not having a convenient online hyperlinked SRD (RIP dndtools), but you can find some good homebrew in dndwiki.com/dnd-wiki.org (both of those are the same site). Also, more Tome material can be found here.

[mean_liar]

Pathfinder is the better starter, for the sake of their full SRD. DnDTome would be my second. ...but that's for a starter, out-of-the-box experience.

I do think that asking "what do I want out of this game" is a really important question to ask. My personal preference for high fantasy is currently Hero6e, owing to the fact that I don't like the exponential power curve of DnD but like high fantasy. Mutants and Masterminds might do, but personally I don't like how their combat resolves for high fantasy (just can't escape the comic book feel).

[Orion]

It's worth noting that while Frank Trollman's "tomes" and the rest of this board's D&D content was written for 3.5, Frank's most important book was never finished, and the books that do exist aren't even fully compatible with each other. The other content on the board has similarly spotty viability. "Tome D&D" isn't not really a game so much as a pre-fab kit for assembling games, and adapting your favorites parts to Pathfinder is probably almost as easy as adapting them to 3.5 I'm salty about Pathfinder because I've *already* patched together a version of 3.5 enhanced by Den material, but if you haven't got that sunk cost you may as well start from Pathfinder.

[mean_liar]

Agree. My personal preference is DnD3.5 + House Rules + custom PrCs + custom setting, but if you're coming from scratch those House Rules are a bunch of guesses, the PrCs are even worse, and the setting is probably largely divorced from mechanics that are supposed to define it.

[RadiantPhoenix]

Quick! Koumei! Make a version of N1 d20 that includes all the basic gameplay rules and such!

[Mask_De_H]

The answer to your question is Pathfinder. Everything in it is free online, and that is a huge boon. It'd be cool if you started with 3.0/3.5 (3.5 has the core material plus some extras for free online as well), but honestly you don't have to. All three games listed are similar enough that you could switch between them pretty comfortably. We're just used to 3.0/3.5 because we've been playing since then or earlier. If you're starting from zero, you don't have that brand loyalty.

If you do go with 3.0/3.5, you should check out the Tomes. They weren't completed, but the classes and the dissertations on several aspects of the playspace are useful. You may or may not want to use the item rules, since they were never completed.