I've made a horrible mistake, /tg/ >Really want to run

Just play the game that everyone else likes. The most important thing is that you have a good time with your friends. If that has to be with pathfinder, make the most of it. If it's impossible to convince them to play a different system, just go along with their preference.

Just make a bunch of house rules. The main reason to hate PF is that it dosen't fix the issues with 3.5, but it isn't really any more busted. More boring possibly, but not busted. Just ditch PF classes and use tome of battle+psionics(no erudite). There are some other comonly known holes to patch, but ToB+Psionics fixes most of them.

>>54369274
I ran Planescape in 3.x (I say .x because the .0/.5 turnover happened mid campaign) It was fun and insane and like you fucked up and said probably the one place where the system bloat isn't as much a problem.

As of now, I still play in 3.x. I'd like to move on to greener pastures, but most of my group doesn't want to learn another system so other than slowly pushing it out with 5e I have to just make the old fucker work. General Advice? Normally I'd talk a lot about culling bloat but yeah, Planescape, more allowable. I don't know about PF compared to core 3e so I don't know if you need to account for tiers. My advice to you

>Everyone creates the party TOGETHER even if they will meet in adventure 1
>Everyone submits their intended build -- if not a whole 20 level progression at least an idea of where they want to go. It's not written in stone but it lets you and the others know something of what to prepare for
>FFS start above Level 1, this is goes triple for Planescape.
>Let folks play Planars/Sigil natives or Primes as befits them.
>If you get primes from different prime worlds or a prime/planar mix, let each character's arrival in Sigil be part of their backstory. Again, have everyone at the table while you're all deciding where you came from and workshop it.
>How long any Primes have been in the planes can be variable from "A couple months, not really long enough to not be a green prime" to "Literally stumbled through a portal yesterday"
>Keep the adventure in Sigil for a little while; let them make some connections while solving a mystery or two, introduce the Primes to the factions (if you're playing pre-faction-war, especially) and develop allegiences
>See what kinds of ideas people bite on in Sigil and use that to guide developing future adventures. If they want to fight crime, maybe don't have the Harmonium and Mercykillers act as the campaign heels.

>>54369274
4e is pretty damn good for Planescape, but 3.PF pushing non-core classes can make do.

It'll still be bloated, there's still some fucked up scaling, you'll still have to bullshit your monsters, but using Dreamscarred Press material + PF half/quarter casters (alchemist, bard, bloodrager, etc.) you got some fun, varied gameplay going on.

>>54369783
>4e is pretty damn good for Planescape
>4e
>Good
I'm sorry, I you've made an error. There should be an odd number of negatives in that statement. The rotting, cancerous husk of 3.pf is still better than anything 4e.

>>54369274
3.5's planescape is no longer much to talk about. Factions are dead, and the remainder retreated to their own niches by that point only call backs being the like of dragon magazine articles which might involve a player

>>54369949
>Not just using pre-Faction War lore with whatever rules suit you.

And Faction War was late 2e at that. Wizards just made the poor choice of not rolling that shit back.

>>54369893
I can't think of a single thing 3.5 does better for Planescape than 4e.

But since you seem to be intimately familiar with both, maybe you can help shed some light on that?

>>54369893

4e is a well designed game. That it doesn't fit your preferences doesn't make it innately bad. It also isn't a game that's suitable for everything, but that doesn't mean it's suitable for nothing.

With Planescape in mind, it depends. If you're going for a more grounded experience, a difficult journey through the planes, 2e or perhaps 5e would be your best bet. 4e, however, very much works if you go for a more pulp fantasy feel, of great heroes venturing across the many worlds with sword and spell. it's about knowing the traits of systems and how they help or hinder the various premises you might run with them.

>>54369975
E, they're not gone, they're all just doing their own thing now.

Xaosictects get a PrC which lets them force rerolls and turn all sound into audible shitposting as the ultimate cuntwaffles.

>>54369274

It's possible to run a good game in 3.PF, even if it's kind of a bitch. Stick to tier 3/4 classes, ban OP content, crunch the math of encounter design yourself rather than using the botched CR system... Yeah, it's a bitch and a half, way harder than it has any right to be, but it can still be fun.

>>54369274
>>/Tg/ and others told me that 2e is fuckaweful so I never considered it
Biggest mistake right there. Even if you don't consider the rules but the settings, 1e and 2e versions of settings are always the definitive versions whereas 3e+ are castrated and 0e/basic are barebones. Also, 1e/2e is vastly superior to 3.pf.

>>54369274
Just run it in 2e my dude. The best material is in that, and it's totally fine and WAY better than 3.pf. If you want simple and easy you can do 5e, I suppose, for a much more magical and high power game from the word go.