I am interested in getting into the Tabletop scene but I'd like to know what would be a decent mix to get my foot in the door. I've never played anything like this before but it seems wicked fun once you get the hang of it.
>>45528662
None of them, because Pathfinder is a bad game. Play D&D 5e instead.
You can get pregenerated characters from DM's Guild and your local gaming store probably hosts Encounters.
>>45528662
Play the stuff that appeals to you, this isn't rocket science.
Play what you want senpai. It'll be easiest to play something you enjoy and have ideas how to play.
Keep in mind though people will groan if you roll an elf ranger orphan or something cliche. Just put work into making the character your own.
>>45528909
>>45528947
>play what you want
>in Pathfinder
wew lads
>>45528725
5e is garbage, Pathfinder is perfectly fine. Human is a good place to start, and whatever class you pick will be fine. I recommend bard; it's not too complicated, it's a good introduction to a lot of mechanics, and it's hella fun to be the diplomancer.
>>45529464
>5e is garbage, Pathfinder is perfectly fine
>>45529530
To be fair, Pathfinder is pretty easy for a newbie to pick up, so it might not be a bad place to start.
Anyway OP, I'd recommend rolling a human fighter of you're going Pathfinder. It's really as simple as you can get.
>>45529464
You sir, are a retard of the highest order.
>>45528725
>5e
>mechanics that just say 'let the GM figure it out'
>yet another caster supremacy edition
Least path of war has Tome of Battle/Path of war
>>45529834
>Pathfinder is pretty easy for a newbie to pick up
>>45529910
>applying a bandaid to system fixes it
>>45528662
If you can find a 5e group, play that instead.
If you can only find PF, Human Wizard/Summoner/Druid/Cleric should be fine.
I don't see why people say pathfinder is a hard game to get into for your first game.
There's very little open to interpretation and there's rules for almost anything that'll come up in a game which means you'll probably never need to improvise or think. Creating a character takes like 20 minutes at most and it only starts getting stupid when you add in the rare races.
>>45528662
Go for the type of character that you like, and be open to suggestions as for class. I´d say avoid anything with prepared 9-level casting (cleric, wizard, druid) - they are powerful, but the bookkeeping is a pain in the ass.
For a new character, I would suggest ranger, barbarian, maybe fighter if Unchained rules are allowed (combat stamina and background skills), unchained rogue, oracle or sorcerer if you want to specialize in casting and bard or inquisitor if you want a jack of all trades.
>>45531889
>There's very little open to interpretation and there's rules for almost anything that'll come up in a game which means you'll probably never need to improvise or think.
THIS IS EXACTLY WHY IT'S A TERRIBLE GAME FOR NEWBIES
>>45532090
How?
It teaches them the basics of roleplaying without immediately overrunning them and demanding them to put in a lot of creativity. Sure there's still some but it's pretty minor and the system does almost everything for you leaving the players to just get comfortable with the idea of playing a character and rolling a dice for their actions.
Rules are also ridiculously easy to look up and very little time is wasted on this.
>>45528725
I'd like 5e more if its fanboys weren't this obnoxious.
>>45528662
Core race. Core class. Not that hard.
Play what you like, but check your group's composition and whether or not there are any tier fanatics that will give you any shit for playing a 'tier 5' class.
>>45528662
For beginners I would stay completely with the core book. It may leave you a little underpowered compared to the rest of the party depending on how much shit is allowed. So play what interests you. Although if you want to be a caster I recommend Sorcerer over Wizard, the book keeping is a lot easier. Especially for a beginner. Also probably avoid the monk unless you really want it, they are pretty damn weak.
As long as I'm hear I just wanted to say Dwarf Druid is my absolute favorite race/class combination. My 5e character multiclassed into barbarian as well. Raging bearded bear, mother fucker.
>>45532166
The more rules a game has the more you need to read and memorize. The ones you don't memorize you need to look up, if you need to look shit up it slows down game time. And with so many combat rules, options and modifiers it quickly becomes a miniatures game in combat and sucks people out of roleplaying.
It's not fucking rocket science.
>>45534366
I have never had a game stop for more than 15 seconds to look up a rule. You won't need to stop to look up something in 80% of fights either.
Have you ever actually played pathfinder or just shitpost about it.
>Playing a DnD derivative
Do you actively hate yourself and your players? I assure you a gun is a quicker and less painful alternative to years of prolonged torture.
>>45528662
In a well-designed gamenot 3.PF, and with a good group, the class you pick shouldn't matter too much. It's all about your character concept, and pretty much anything can be refluffed to fit.
>>45534611
>>45534366
>>45532090
>>45528947
>>45531889
>>45532074
...I'm getting mixed messages regarding this question, one side says Pathfinder is fine for beginners and the other says it isn't. I'm not really experienced enough on this to know who to listen to, what are the differences a newbie would have between DnD and Pathfinder?
>>45536263
Pathfinder and D&D 3.5 are essentially the same game, you really could just merge the two and not even notice.
I've heard d&d 5th is good for beginners, but not played it.
If you do play pathfinder I'd reccommend playing a class like a barbarian, you get used to having easily noticeable strengths and weaknesses and your rage ability offers a lot of choice and customization for how you want to play.
>>45536263
Pathfinder is a continuation of one of the most dense and least balanced rules systems to ever be sold. You hear people talk about FATAL but there are only a handful of games with less comprehensive and detailed rules than Pathfinder. It's popular because that terrible 3.5 OGL system was so popular that it is taking decades for the interest to die out. Part of the problem being that there is such a large investment into the game to even learn the rules that it makes it hard to walk away - and many people have spend a lto of money on 3.PF games.
Literally any other D&D edition has less downtime, less rolling, and generally less time wasted in meaningless bullshit during encounters. It's also completely broken in terms of balance where magic users are vastly superior to non-magic using classes in most situations, there is an expectation that magic marts for buying whatever item a player needs in the balancing of the game that is there but it is typically ignored, and most "tactics" involve rolling better in initiative and then rolling better than the other guy so he dies in a couple hits.
I prefer 5e in terms of D&D because it's easier to play a story and the games are grittier and fast moving. A lot of people like 4e because it's easy to GM. A lot of people still play AD&D for some reason. And even older editions are extremely rules light and makes it very quick to play - though they have plenty of strange quirks that can be a problem.
So, OP, play 5e both because the rules are less investment to learn and play and because making a character is simple. Some other good reasons to play would be that it is the easier to join a game, most of the horror stories you run across here are from 3.pf games, and it is at the beginning of its life so you have years of playing ahead of you while Pathfinder is so ancient that there is very little left to do in the system. Paizo denies it but they will need a new edition soon.
>>45536263
>>45536372
Also, I have two recommendations for beginners in Pathfinder.
1) You want to be a hero? Be a paladin. Grab some heavy armor, the largest sword you can, and smite shit. Paladins don't have to worry about health or saves, they do great burst damage, and you don't have a lot of choices to make or new systems to learn until you are a few levels into the game and have enough experience to start casting spells. You do have to be the lawful good shining knight though, and some GMs are dicks to paladins because they are faggots.
2) If you want to be a roguish or misanthropic character, play a Slayer. They are straight forward and easy to play and very effective. Ranger also works, though Slayer is a little simpler to play.
And do yourself a favor and crib a guide: http://zenithgames.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-comprehensive-pathfinder-guides.html
>>45536372
>>45536511
Okay so D&D is a better choice then to start. Alright then, and the starting class to choose from is Barbarian? Sure okay, I think I can have fun hitting things with the biggest axe I can find. Is there a limit to how a Barbarian can behave? The aspect that is inviting the most is the storytelling and I like the idea of creating and developing an in-depth character.
>>45537624
There's no limit on behavior, you can play a civilized and refined gentleman, a savage wildman, a 7ft tall sex obsessed amazon woman.
Create whatever character you want, the only criteria for a barbarian is that they get very angry during combat (technically you don't have to, but there's no point playing a barbarian if you don't rage)
>>45529834
>Recommending Fighter
Why do you want OP to hate RPGs, anon?
>>45529910
>mechanics that just say 'let the GM figure it out'
Like what?
>yet another caster supremacy edition
Casters are still more versatile, but it's not like martials are shit any more (except the Monk and Ranger, sadly).
>>45537670
Huh, alright, mind if I bounce some concept ideas around? I'd like to see what is good and what isn't and this is the first time I've gotten experienced player's attention to help me figure things out.
>>45538126
Sure
>>45538076
5e Monk is fine, except for that one shitty archetype.
>>45538146
Krof; A Whaler from the North Seas, he specializes in the use of harpoons and javelins, as well as makeshift polearms. Generally he dresses in fur pelts and leather wrapping though he also carries several whale bone charms on his possession in the forms of necklaces and piercings.
Short bio: A fine example of what the harsh frozen wastes can produce, Krof is a muscled lean man who values the thrill of the hunt as well as the danger it presents. Used to hunting massive beasts and swimming in frozen seas, Krof is no stranger to danger and actively seeks it out. His reasoning for venturing south is to find even more challenging prey. His motivations don't go beyond the challenge combat presents itself, as well as his ultimate goal of dying to some great monster to perpetuate a new legend that would be taken back to his people. He is not simple in mind though he is no philosopher. Krof respects strength and those who tackle their challenges head on, so he has little respect for those who ambush or disrespect a fallen adversary.
He is not above utilizing the dead and their possessions as in his culture it is a show of respect that a defeated foe's legacy lives on in some way.
>>45529834
>>45529464
Jesus fuck.
>>45538448
Seems like a pretty safe concept, don't see why any DM would turn it down.
>>45538586
Alright good to hear! How would I go about stating him? This is usually the part I get yelled at but I've only looked up Pathfinder stating and I don't know if D&D's is different or not.
>>45538777
Since Pathfinder is literally a clone of DnD 3.5 with some houserules on top (it used 3.5's Open Games License to accomplish this)
As for how to stat, you should prioritize Strength and Constitution- Other stats aren't required for your class, and should be assigned as you please.
Exact numbers should be left until you know if your DM is doing rolled or point buy for stats.
>>45538843
Okay, thank you for all the help! Imma try and find some campaigns online for new players (assuming thats the right thing to do).
>>45536263
One side is saying Pathfinder and 3e is good for beginners because THEY began on it, not because it's a fact.
It's kinda like saying "well every job is easy after you spend the first twenty years of your life as a black plantation slave in the Carribean"; yes it's true, but if you think that STARTING that way is somehow normal or natural then your life is to be pitied.
Also; there is no such thing as an "objective" truth in this case. The only fact here is, 5e has less rules and is thus easier to learn. Only an idiot thinks that more rules is easier.
The subjectivity comes from if you LIKE more rules or less rules or not, which is up to you and not them.
If you want to hit things/shoot dudes - Fighter.
If you wanna shoot fireballs and lightning - Sorcerer.
Both are pretty simple in function and good to start with.
Fighter gives you a lot of 'Feats' which means you can guide his development as the campaign progresses and around whatever weapons you find work for you.
Sorcerer is good for magic as you just have 1 small list of spells and you have a set number of spells to cast per day from that list.
Wizards need to fart around with Spellbooks and Clerics need to choose from EVERY CLERIC SPELL IN THE GAME each morning. This can be daunting for newbies.
Sorcerers also let you be dragon-blooded and most new players wanna try this once.
These are 'the best' choices but are great for first timers.
>>45539553
Sorry - these ARE NOT* the 'the best choices...
Barbarian isn't too bad either. Similar to fighter, but better at smashing people up close. You basically get a 'super mode' for a few rounds each day where you get super strong for the cool factor. Probably a better choice if you wanna lay down big damage and have more obvious impact in combat.
>>45539553
You recommend the two class that if you fuck up, you can't fix, since your shit is set in stone, and they are really easy to fuck up, because both needs to make choices from out of 1000s of feats and spells.
Sorcerer will at least accidentally luck into some good spells I guess.
Anyway, best beginner PF class is to not play PF.
Best beginner class if you absolutely positively can not avoid playing PF is the druid. You get an animal companion, you get spells, you get to turn into animals; there's basically no bad way to play the druid, it's really hard to fuck up.
>>45538448
http://www.dmsguild.com/product/171030/Pregen-Characters-Human-Barbarian-5e?manufacturers_id=44&filters=0_0_0_0_45462_0
>>45528662
I recommend not starting with Pathfinder. If you want a quick, D&D style game with simple rules to get you into it, I recommend Basic Fantasy Roleplaying Game. Google it. All their books are free as PDFs, and if you want to buy them, you can find the core book on Amazon for ~$4.50.
It's cheap, easy to learn, some of the rules knowledge will carry over to more complicated versions of D&D like Pathfinder, and if you don't like it, you didn't spend ~$90 on books you'll never use again.
>first post in
>edition wars
They should hang the lot of you.
>>45536263
I'm going to try to provide an unbiased answer as much as possible.
For the record, I tried 5e, did not like it, and went back to Pathfinder, but neither is a perfect game, and there are lots of things I don't like about Pathfinder as well.
Both have very similar core mechanics.
5e has an order of magnitude less character customization opportunities and options available, it also has far less in the way of prebuilt adventures or challenges.
Pathfinder has far more opportunities and options (like 30+ times more), but there's a wide range of quality. This goes for small options such as feats, or spells, as well as large options, such as races and classes.
There are pretty thorough guides that the community has made that simplify playing the thing you thought sounded cool and tell you flat-out what the better options are and why, but without that (as a newbie) you can screw yourself if you don't know what you're doing by locking yourself into a bunch of options that either don't work well together or don't work well period, because of a poor understanding of how the game works (and again, its not spelled out for you).
You can start playing pathfinder at a wide variety of levels, and the rules for doing so are spelled out for you quite clearly. For instance, in our group we tend to start between level 4 and 6, and our campaign tends to run up to level 15 to 17.
5e has very little in the way of useful guidelines for starting above level 1, and what IS there tends to result in characters far weaker than if you had started at level 1 - which is a big deal if you're joining a game part way through.
5e has quick and dirty rules for building challenges. Pathfinder has in depth time consuming rules for building challenges (though there is an option for quick and dirty, its not in the two main books).
>>45542044
Pathfinder has lots of adventure and challenge content (enemies and the like). 5e doesn't have all that much. It's newer, yes, but also they're not making very much content.
In Pathfinder, you need the right equipment in order to keep up (barring some optional rules that I'm not going to get into). There's a chart that says how much wealth you should have at a given level. Everything is designed around you having that much stuff, and having ~75% of it in the stuff that makes you more effective at what you're good at. Not all classes rely on their gear equally, and the weaker classes need it the most.
In 5e, they play it more fast and loose, and your equipment is less important by default.
My personal preference is for Pathfinder, telling the newbies to refer to guides and giving them advice in designing their characters, steering them toward more effective options.
IMO 5e does some things better and other things worse, and for myself, its better stuff doesn't outweigh its worse stuff, so I'd rather play Pathfinder.
And as a bonus for Pathfinder, all the character options and rules can be found online for free at Archives of Nethys and d20PFSRD, all far better sorted than they ever are in the books themselves, simply because the online copy is always up to date and includes everything.
IME you can find players for either, pretty easily.
>>45542063
If you're okay with non D&D-like games, here are the ones I personally like:
Shadowrun 4e/20th Anniversary,Shadowrun 5e - Both are awesome, but they do play differently. I think I prefer 4e, but not by very much. Probably my favorite game.
RuneQuest/OpenQuest/Legend/Basic Roleplaying/Pendragon - All basically the same system, slight changes. All good games. Far simpler to learn than either D&D-like game, and you can very easily convert content/options between them.
GURPS - There's a basic ruleset that's like 30 pages, and that's the main rules. Then you bolt on the campaign options and character options you like, in order to run whatever game you want to run. Pretty neat. If you only had one game to play forever, this would be the one to take. Can be a little intimidating because there are so many books, but they're all optional addons for specific kinds of games. If you want to run a game of X type, the local GURPS threads can tell you which options you'll want.
FFG Star Wars - Fun system, goofy dice. The magic (force powers) system is a bit weak in comparison to guys who use guns, and starting characters are a bit on the ugh side for me, but if you start your PCs at Knight-Level play, and have them spend their initial XP on attributes, and use the bonus XP for skills and abilities, it works out great. A good system. I typically don't use it to run Star Wars though, I tend to just use it for generic sci-fi, reskinning the existing stuff, or homebrewing my own.
d20 Conan - Based on D&D 3.0 & 3.5, this system is (on the surface) similar to Pathfinder. If you can play Pathfinder, you can play d20 Conan. d20 Conan has much tighter game-balance, much lower reliance on gear, and far less magic. Great Game. Downside, you have to rely entirely on Pirated PDFs. The physical books cost a fortune, and you cant buy the PDFs now.
for me:
SR4>SR5>FFGStarWars>d20 Conan>Pathfinder>RuneQuest>GURPS>5e
>>45542092
Its not that 5e is *bad*, but for any game where I could consider 5e, so far I've always decided I'd rather use RQ/PF/d20Conan, or even SR/FFGSW, instead.
>>45529530
>There are people who argue over two massive turds
>>45528662
Human
Cavalier
MountMoosei think they have like 12+4d6 gore attacks
>>45545087
Neither game is perfect, granted, but:
>They're better than the vast majority of RPGs people have ever tried to get me to play (and that's a lot of games). (WoD, M&M, SW, Deadlands, Rogue Trader, Unisystem, Rolemaster, to name a few.)
>They have lots of content, making you less likely to get crazy bored of the limited content pool.
>They have a sizable active playerbase which means finding a group for them is easy.
>>45545308
>implying either 5e or PF are better than M&M or Unisystem
>implying content bloat is a positive and not a negative
You're right about the last point though.
>>45545898
>implying either 5e or PF are better than M&M or Unisystem
I'm stating it outright.
I'll play PF. I gave away my copy of M&M3e because after a 1 year campaign I was not having fun, I determined I fucking hated it.
Unisystem, GoA has a cool magic system, but most of it I'm not such a fan of. I guess I'd still play it if someone really wanted to run it, but that's about it.
>implying content bloat is a positive and not a negative
In what way is a wealth of content a bad thing?
People who don't like content confuse me. I don't understand the reasoning.
>>45546510
>People who don't like content confuse me. I don't understand the reasoning.
Addendum:
That is, with the exception of a hefty HERO system type rulebook where you can mostly custom build whatever parts you need out of the bits given in the core book. Then I can see how more content can be less valuable.
I object to the bloat of junk content in Pathfinder. If it's so bad it's a waste of a choice, it should not be printed. But objecting to the quantity of content PF has in general? Why would you object to that? I don't understand.
I can sortof see it during the days of 3.5, when there was no equivalent to d20pfsrd or AoN, and you had to try to remember which options were in which book and whatnot, but even then, there were indexes of that stuff freely available that made it pretty easy to find.
>>45528662
Well what are you into, raza? Do you want to CLEAVE AND SMITE? Play a Paladin. Want to be talky, nimble and good with a blade? Bard. Wanna be more of a classic Zap Muthafucka mage? Summoner or Witch; Wizard if you're really feeling yourself. Wanna do drugs and kill shit? Alchemist. Wanna help people and still pull your weight? Cleric.
Whatever you're down for, check out a class guide; zenith games and the paizo board have repositories. Talk to your DM about what's allowed and party composition, then have fun.
Holy shit you edition warring faggots are the worst people. It's all skub anyway.
Just fucking play elfgames, damn.
