So here's my gaming situation. Over last few family vacations, I've been running Pathfinder for my son and two nephews - originally using the Pathfinder Beginner Box. We left things a little hanging over Christmas, so we're continuing with some gaming online. We tried out using Roll20.net as our interface. I suspect as they get older, the kids will be getting more into this. (They're 12, 13, and 14 now.)

I have a ton of experience with GMing and RPGs in general. However, this is my first time trying to run a tabletop RPG online, and my Pathfinder experience is limited (playing in a few con games, and GMing it for the kids).

The short form is that I'm finding it overly complicated for running with kids - mainly in the sheer number of different effects on the character sheet and monster stat blocks (i.e. feats, class abilities, spells, items, etc.). So I'm looking around at sets of house rules or alternate rule set that:

1) Are 100% compatible with using existing Pathfinder material
2) Reduce the clutter of PC characters sheets
3) Speed up resolution of combat

I don't want to re-invent the wheel, so I'm looking over existing approaches to this.

E6 http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?206323-E6-The-Game-Inside-D-amp-D

This is identical to regular Pathfinder up to level 6, then diverges to simplify later levels. However, it does so by adding feats - which seems like it will increase the clutter of character sheets rather than simplifying. In short, it's a change of balance but not a huge simplification.

Perfect20  http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/srd/perfect20/

This is another extreme - a stripped-down version of d20 that focuses on skills and feat trees. Very simplified, but only mildly compatible.

Microlite20  http://microlite20.net/

PathfinderLITE  pathfinderlite | microlited20

These two are closely related, also heavily stripped-down versions of D20.

I'm leaning more towards something more like E6 than the others, but I'm still pondering. If anyone has experiences with online gaming, simplifying Pathfinder, or gaming with kids that seems relevant, I'd be interested. 

For those who do something to simplify Pathfinder, what do you prefer?

I play a lot of E6. I can't even attempt to overstate how much simpler the game is.

There are almost no game balance issues. Fighters, Rogues, Monks and Wizards are a happy family. Almost no one has more than 2 attacks. Only rangers really take a long time to roll dice. Wizards aren't casting quickened spells, and there are no weird rules to look up. NPCs are forever a snap to write up. It is just so much more fun to play and run.

The simplest solution would be E5 with the Beginner Box and EdoWar's BB-compatible versions of the other PF classes. Give (eg) a Feat & some* skill points for every 5,000 XP over 5th. This lets you use the BB indefinitely, and you can add in monsters, magic, etc from non-BB PF to taste.

*I don't know whether it's better to give a level's worth of skill points or a fixed number, maybe 3.

My personal preference with 3e/Pathfinder for adults is to use the BB for short term campaigns and the full rules for long term campaigns, but keep it to the 1-10 level range. I'm currently running an AP (see sig), and am tweaking advancement a bit so it goes roughly 2-10 instead of 1-15.

GMing for my son Bill (6.5) we've tried out various systems. He doesn't seem to like 3e/PF much and prefers Mentzer 'Red Box' BECMI; he also has some interest in 4e, especially the cool monster fluff and the ability to cast spells every round, but he didn't like being kept waiting for his turn when we played a two-player 4e game last summer when a friend of mine visited. We also do Dragon Warriors, which is great for melee characters - he has a cool Knight PC - but I'm not a fan of the magic system(s).

Have you consider a retro clone like Labyrinth Lord, Swords and Wizardry, or OSRIC?

Quote from: estar;726903Have you consider a retro clone like Labyrinth Lord, Swords and Wizardry, or OSRIC?

I considered it. My nephews had originally started with their dad's AD&D1 stuff, then they moved to D&D 4th. My son is familiar with AD&D1, Swords & Wizardry, and Pathfinder - as well as exposure to a bunch of other RPGs. With this as background, the kids all requested Pathfinder.

They're all bright kids and avid readers. We started with the Pathfinder Beginner Box a year ago (only playing on family vacations), but they're now at 3rd level and they've all been reading the full Pathfinder rules. It's not the complexity of the rules per se that's my issue, but just the clutter of too many things to track for me as GM.

Quote from: jhkim;726983I considered it. My nephews had originally started with their dad's AD&D1 stuff, then they moved to D&D 4th. My son is familiar with AD&D1, Swords & Wizardry, and Pathfinder - as well as exposure to a bunch of other RPGs. With this as background, the kids all requested Pathfinder.

They're all bright kids and avid readers. We started with the Pathfinder Beginner Box a year ago (only playing on family vacations), but they're now at 3rd level and they've all been reading the full Pathfinder rules. It's not the complexity of the rules per se that's my issue, but just the clutter of too many things to track for me as GM.

I hear you. That's why I'm not touching Pathfinder - 3e was way too much information and  time required to create an NPC for me, and that's coming from someone who started out with Warhammer & CoC, both games where you had to fully stat out an NPC.

One thing I'd emphasize is that while E6 does work by adding feats at that level most of the feats they could take would be primarily boosts to their abilities not new abilities.

I don't think there's a ton of conditional bonus type feats available at level six- it'd mostly be new hit points or something like that, especially if you make the suggested "extra" feats available.

You could just expand from the beginner box, extrapolating that level of complexity into higher levels. Its easier build onto that then try and subtract from the full version.

Quote from: jhkim;726983It's not the complexity of the rules per se that's my issue, but just the clutter of too many things to track for me as GM.

Are you creating your own adventures? Or using published material as well?

I am asking this because if you are determined to use published material then you are going to get hosed by the Pathfinder complexity issue. If you largely use your own material then I have some suggestions.

Do you have issues with complexity with the characters that the player made?

I am asking this because if the main problem is one your workload then again I have some suggestions.

I refereed Hero System and GURPS for a long time. If anything those games have more options, more effects, and more flexibility than the d20 system put out by Wizards.

The way I deal with it is that I have a folder of stock NPCs, and monster list that I accumulated over the years. If I make something new I generally take something existing and change one or two things.

You can do that with Pathfinder. Make a list of NPCs and Monsters that you want to use and learn just that list. When you need something new just take an existing item, change a few things, and use it.

You could just say its the core book only. Be firm but understanding when you say not to when the players want to use X from Y book.  This will minimize the amount of stuff you have to learn or track.

I taught GURPS to a friend who played in my game and wanted to run a campaign using it. I explained to him that you need to define what goes into your GURPS campaign first or it will overwhelmed you.

Of course he didn't listen to me. He and his group used just about every option there was and the result just collapsed under the weight of trying to figure out what is what.

Pathfinder, 3.X, and other d20 games have the same issues. The wealth of supplements presents a such a diverse range of options that to keep the game sane the referee's first job should be to define what his setting has. Unless you are willing to be a d20 uber grognard it will crush you otherwise.

Pathfinder (like normal 3.x) is a game where there's a lot of burden on the GM, much moreso than the players. Certainly I've seen 12-14 year olds play 3.5 without any problems. My wife used to run a library group, years ago, for a group of high school kids...it was cute up until they started learning min/maxing.
Online may help by letting workload be spread out, perhaps, or you could try moving them onto an adventure path. Otherwise I imagine the rules system is something everyone will get used to in time, and should run OK after that. I guess its just the adjustment period that's unpleasant.

Im a big fan of microlite 20. I think it is smooth and pretty intuitive. Especially if you've ever played any d20 game. I find it easy to make stuff up for it on the fly.

I've been looking to prune down Pathfinder myself. The two biggest areas to take an axe to are skills and feats.

Skills: two options, use the 4e skill system where you learn a skill once, rather than picking ranks each level. Roll D20 + ability mod + 1/2 level + 5 if trained in the skill vs target DC.

The other option, which I am going to use is replace skills with backgrounds from 13th Age. Players have 8 points to spend on various backgrounds they make up (maximum of 5 pts in any one background). Sample backgrounds include alchemist, wandering minstrel, bounty hunter etc. Players roll d20 + ability mod + character level + background level vs DC to attempt a skill-like action that would be covered by their backgrounds.

Feats: Most pathfinder classes have enough class-specific abilities to make them interesting. I am considering dropping the standard feat progression altogether and give characters 1 starting feat. Fighters etc. still get their bonus feats, but no one gets the standard 1 feat every odd level. Monsters and NPCs don't get feats.

Pimping my own stuff: Click on the link for Legends & Labyrinths in my .sig. Only a beta was ever released, but its rules-complete. (It's missing spells and monsters, but those can be grabbed from the usual suspects.)

The system was designed to be 100% compatible with 3.5, making it functionally 99.5% compatible with Pathfinder material. For more on what I mean by 100% compatibility, click here.

If I wanted to simplify or prune down pathfinder, I would just play one of the older versions of dnd, or retro versions.

Quote from: jhkim;726860For those who do something to simplify Pathfinder, what do you prefer?

Play Savage Worlds.