Spent the last few days collecting the feedback from a few absolute beginners regarding the beginner
sets of D&D 5th and Pathfinder, (Swift disclaimer, bribes may have been levied in the
form of various sweets in return for their attention to the subject
matter). I also got the opinion of a few
people who don’t actually play fantasy games, as I figured that asking someone
who already has a take on the games would probably have a level of Bias
involved that I’m trying to avoid.
Starting with the general layout of the box and the artwork within,
Pathfinder scored heavily for being full colour all the way through, and not
just the colours of the artwork, but the backgrounds and the way that the
images were put together.
Everyone noticed that the front cover image of the D&D box set was used repeatedly...
 |
Whereas the pathfinder art was only repeated on the stand characters and only
then to identify that the stand was that particular creature or character. The other thing noted was that the D&D
box set felt cheaper, more due to the lack of things within the box (and the
filler space), whereas the pathfinder box was quite literally crammed to the
top with usable accessories.
The absence of the percentile die was noted by a few of the beginners,
with some of them looking at it from the point of view that a single die
removed from a million units would probably save some money, but at the same
time, it also gave the impression that the game had been looking to cut corners,
particularly when you came to the demonstration characters and the addition of
various leaflets, assistance, and other pamphlets in the Pathfinder box.
 |
| Who would have thought that one extra die was such a big deal...? |
So we moved on to rules, and with both of the systems sharing at least
some common ground from the previous editions, it was more a matter of how
things had evolved since the time of Third Edition. Spell usage and casting requirements on both
sides were viewed as a little confusing, with one particularly enterprising
rogue figuring that if you steal the mages box of components, you effectively
reduce them to casting things that aren’t that powerful, which isn’t strictly
true, but it means that they were at least giving it some thought.
That the Pathfinder had character sheets clearly laid out with the
various actions that could be done was both noticed and appreciated, with the
D&D sheets seeming somewhat bare by comparison. All agreed that characters should be rolled
up to see if the difference was still apparent when it wasn’t all singing all
dancing, and so they were...
There was more back and forth glancing with the Pathfinder than the
D&D, but with the way the blank characters were laid out, back and forth
element took less time than the few bits of checking that the D&D
required. While I thought that the
addition of the character generation rules for free as a download was a good
move on the part of D&D, I was almost universally disagreed with by the
beginners, all of which were much happier to have a book in their hands to flip
through and considered the lack of said rules to look through in the box to be
a dreadful larceny.
I shall not repeat the exact commentary given, but it was spirited...
While they did do the character generation in the end with a printed
out version of the rules, they did say that they would have found it far more
tedious to have to do it by screen.
Which brings us to the adventures given to run through and both adventures
offered getting a run through the first scenario only, rather than try and run
through the campaign (and therefore delaying this review another month...), it
was agreed that the board and the stands made it easier to visualise things, but
it also added an unwanted dimension of turning any combat situation into a
skirmish wargame which removed some of them from the feeling that they were
playing something in their heads.
Somewhat counterbalanced when the board was removed while talking was
going on. Some liked, some didn’t, but
the fact that the option to use the board with the starter set was
appreciated. With the D&D maps on
the A4 size paper, the book had to be passed around to get the same impression
as in the middle of the table, it wasn’t large enough for everyone to look at.
Adventure done, the Advantage/Disadvantage mechanism was talked about
quite a bit, and while the Pathfinder rules were better laid out and clearer
for the most part, there was little variance in the actions the characters
could take, and most players didn’t feel confident attempting something not on
the sheets.
That brought into play the GM’s sections of each box, a lot more ways
around using things and tricks for new GM’s to try to get things working in the
Pathfinder box, whereas the D&D box contained a few pages and skimmed over
most of it. It was generally agreed that
while it would take longer to play through the D&D mini campaign, you’d
have nothing to do at the end of it, whereas the Pathfinder instructions gave
you ideas on what to do when you were done with the material that you were
given.
That brought us on to the Monster Manual and creatures listed within...
From an experienced GM point of view, I’m happy to work with what I
have to make something different, I know how to vary the hit points or attack
bonuses to make things more or less difficult, and I’ve been doing that for
years, so it’s second nature to me.
From the beginners point of view, it did not go unnoticed that the only
things listed as monsters in the D&D box were those that were in the
provided adventure, many of them without artwork to accompany them, only a
written description. Very much the feel
of “If you want more, there’s a monster manual coming out soon”.
On the other hand, the
pathfinder had all the creatures in the scenario and more, all in full colour
with their own images.
More than that though, when the creatures were encountered
in the D&D book, there was the comment of “Go look it up”, whereas the
Pathfinder stats were listed next to the creature in the scenario. More monsters to play with in Pathfinder
swung that particular vote decisively.
Small touches to be sure, but all the difference that needs to be made
when it comes to people just starting out, both players and GM’s.
This in particular was the thing that made the difference to all of the
beginners, the D&D set expected that if you needed a rule, you went and
looked it up, the Pathfinder saved you the time and put the rule there for you
to save you that half minute of looking.
Everything was geared towards keeping you in the game and not in the
rulebooks, and even though I hadn’t picked up on that (knowing most of the
rules anyway...), it is a good way to start people playing, keep them as much
in the game as possible, which isn’t possible if you have to break game every
few minutes to check on something.
In the end, the beginners said that even though the pathfinder is more
expensive by a small amount, the additional expense is more than worth it. While they would play both games given the
choice, they found the Pathfinder more interesting in presentation and ease of
use, they liked the options that it gave them and that you could play for a
long time with just the basic set without having to buy anything else.
So in the Game of Games, D&D may indeed be Tywin to Pathfinders
Tyrion, and both sides will have those that prefer them for different reasons,
but in this test, Tyrion has certainly caught Tywin with his pants down...
And that’s never a good thing...
