I want to get into D&D

[DoPo]

So if that same Wizard has a +2 int item by 8th level, that's 9 skills at max ranks.

Compared to the skill monkey that is the rogue, who'd likely go with 10 skills at max or so. Actual dedicated skill monkeys would have one or two more. Or maybe more skills but not necessarily at max. At any rate, the difference is not that great, despite the wizard only getting 2 instead of 8 base skill points.

Exactly my point. The Rogue has no reason to pump her Int, but the Wizard does (caster stat) so the low skill points per level is compensated for.

There are only 10 knowledge skills, after all. If you want to make a Wise Sage wizard, then you really only have to worry about 11 skills (10 knowledge skills plus spellcraft).

The Rogue, on the other hand, has around 13-16 core skills (depending on whether you count Appraise, Climb, Diplomacy, and Intimidate). Several of those (Disable Device and Perception) must be maxed to make basic class features function at the intended DCs. Hence why the Rogue needs 8 skill points per level. The Wizard can still cast spells if she has taken no ranks in Spellcraft, but the Rogue can't find or disable traps if she doesn't have those skills maxed.

Anyway, I've never had a problem with the skill system except maybe for Clerics.

Yeah. And...I don't think the skill system is actually flawed in any way. At least not itself problems. Skills are pretty meh as they go. Well, ok, not exactly...that's not the intention behind them, that's the end result. If you want to be a good at X you need to keep honing it, otherwise you fall behind. That's inherent problem with the entire system itself. You have to keep chasing that DC that shifts all the time or you might as well not bother. You actually have to keep up with being average - that's ludicrous. And due to the small RNG range you can very easily throw the scales off in either direction of "easy" or "hard". Then the DM has to keep up with preserving the average (ideally, that is). It's like the whole game is about keeping up with raising the bar, only let's just for this example reverse that metaphor and say that the bar needs to be lowered. So the bar is rolling down the hill it is, and everybody is chasing it - if the players start to catch up, the DM has speed up and kick it. The ones who can't run fast enough may as well not bother. It's a pointless and redundant task...

Sorry, I tend to ramble. My point, which I went off on a tangent of, was that while the system has flaws, big flaws and quite a few of them, the "wizards not living up to theirs stereotype" isn't one of them. And I'm continouly baffled by people making this claim "oh, wizards are as knowledgeable as fighters"...yeah, right - the wizards get access to friggin useful skills and get a ton of skillpoints to boot. The fighters actually get 2 skills to max. Maybe 3-4 if they are humans and up to...what, 5? None of that matters, since their choice of class skills sucks balls, so they won't really want to devote themselves to pursuing many anyway. I just looked it up how they are in Pf and I saw that there they at least get a slight boost with two knowledge skills and Survival. A guy with reputation of being a bookworm gets access and the ability and the resources to devote to using bookwormy stuff is compared to a guy who can barely get to do a very limited selection of shit stuff. Clearly the two are absolutely equal.

 

[kwagamon]

All I know is if you plan on doing anything where combat is a feature, 3rd, 3.5, or 4th, don't go with graph paper. You can get large sheets of what is effectively giant, laminated 1x1-inch square graph paper, most of the ones you can get without homebrewing fold smaller than a piece of paper. This may sound the same, but it means that the squares are already the right size to put most minis or other visual representations on. Since it's laminated, it lets you use dry/wet-erase markers to draw maps. If you don't have minis, it's also much easier to use dry-erase markers than a pencil to mark where your character is. Also, they're fairly cheap. The graph paper is cheaper, but one of these mats, plus any associated shipping if you order it online (such as the blank Paizo flip-mat), is still going to only total $20 or less for a vastly easier play experience.

If you're going combat-light, then there's nothing wrong with graph paper.

Also, I actually really love 4th as a tool for getting people more familiar with the base concepts. There's a lot of difference, but mostly in an attempt to streamline and make it generally easier. No more wizards with only 4 health who die outright because they knocked on a trapped door or the like. If you know 3rd, you'll probably be able to teach them that easier than teach them 4th, but as a sort of "baby's first RPG," it's very good. Me and my friends are doing 5th Edition beta playtests, and I can say that 5th is looking like it's going even further down that road. The development team has actively said they want someone who's never played anything even LIKE D&D before to be able to make a character in 20 minutes or so.

Aaaaaanyway, sorry for tangent. I recommend instead of graph paper a large, laminated map with 1x1-inch squares printed on it for generally-easier use. An expansion set isn't required in the slightest unless you REALLY want race/class/setting diversity. And as I noticed others have mentioned, I'd highly recommend getting a Dungeon Master's Guide.

 

[Nigh Invulnerable]

Having played for 20+ years now, I can say that Pathfinder is basically 3rd/3.5th edition on steroids, and is much better for it. Every class has a reason to take their next level up beyond just gaining hit points, skill points, and maybe saving throw improvements (a huge problem with DnD in 3rd/3.5th ed.) and there's a million class archetypes you can use if you want your Fighter to be skilled with a certain style of weapons, or your Wizard to specialize in divinations, etc. 4th Edition is terrible, and is in fact quite newb friendly, but lost some of the flavor I enjoyed in the past. I'm not sure I can entirely pin that down for you though.

If you do go with Pathfinder, here are the tools to pick up:
-1 Core Rulebook (it has all the rules for both players and DMs in one book)
-1 Bestiary (I'd go with the first volume as it has most of the classic goblins, ogres, orcs, dragons, etc.)
-Loads of dice for everyone. Most hobby shops have sets and loose dice you can buy individually. Load up on d6s for all those rogues, fireball spells, and other such things. There are dice-rolling apps for smart phones if people don't want to buy dice, though it takes away some of the charm of rolling in front of everyone and hoping for that 20 instead of a 1.

Optional things:
-Miniatures and a 1" grid map with some erasable markers will help you visualize combat encounters and determine whether Joe's wizard gets caught in the dragon's fire or not. That said, miniatures are not 100% crucial if the group has a good imagination.
-Advanced Player's Guide, Ultimate Combat, Ultimate Magic, etc. More class options, more spells, and tons of goodies.

EDIT: Oh, if you've played KOTOR at all it is basically running on DnD 3rd ed/Pathfinder style rules anyway, so that might be a good place for basic understanding of the system.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

I have a suggestion, as I have only recently got into this sort of thing myself and was recommended this, and it helped, the Pathfinders Beginners box!

I understand the basics now thanks to it and it comes with a grid mat and cardboard figures etc to use for the game, it has a demo scenario to play out with your friends so they can see what the stuffs like etc and it has two books, comes with all the dice needed. You can use some premade characters or make your own, it's not as open as the full game, but it's a start. The game mat has two sides, one that's just a grid and another that has a premade dungeon on it.


This video shows all that comes in it etc, hope I've helped. Anyone else who's used it, chime in with what you think.

 

[Rufio's Ghost]

Oh, and for party composition, I tend to suggest a medic(cleric, oracle, witch, paladin, bards and druids can cover here in a pinch), an asskicker (fighter, monk, cavalier, paladin, ranger), a utility-type (thief, wizard, bard, witch, if it's got a big spell list or lots of skill points, it counts), and a blaster (alchemist, sorceror, wizard, ranger, maybe even a gunslinger, though I'd want to tinker with them before tossing them in).

And if you want one player to be able to do anything and everything... Let them be a summoner.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

That's inherent problem with the entire system itself. You have to keep chasing that DC that shifts all the time or you might as well not bother. You actually have to keep up with being average - that's ludicrous. And due to the small RNG range you can very easily throw the scales off in either direction of "easy" or "hard". Then the DM has to keep up with preserving the average (ideally, that is). It's like the whole game is about keeping up with raising the bar, only let's just for this example reverse that metaphor and say that the bar needs to be lowered. So the bar is rolling down the hill it is, and everybody is chasing it - if the players start to catch up, the DM has speed up and kick it. The ones who can't run fast enough may as well not bother. It's a pointless and redundant task...

Um... I haven't ever seen this happen (unless a DM is being particularly dickish). When I ran the Rise of the Runelords Anniversary Edition recently, the Rogue in the party had a base skill modifier higher than most trap DCs (that is, she couldn't fail because her flat modifier exceeded the 25 DC traps) by 10th level. She had to roll a 5 to get the magical CR 15 traps.

In the game before that, one of my players at around 15th level would consistently roll 45s on Sense Motive checks. Part of that was luck (she almost never rolled less than a 10 on Sense Motive). And, since I'm NOT a dickish DM, I didn't increase the DCs to match - she always succeeded at Sense Motive. Because the numbers said she should always succeed.

Of course, that doesn't mean she could read minds. But she was very, very good at picking up on emotional states.

The point is, unless the GM is specifically raising DCs to challenge the player (and the GM shouldn't HAVE to - opposed rolls with CR appropriate characters should take care of the necessary challenges, and flat DCs should be just that - Flat) what you're describing doesn't really happen. In Pathfinder anyway. I don't recall it happening in basic 3.5 either (again, unless the DM was being a dick).