theroc's page

If the PDF version is done, you should give us an early Christmas present and release it now. My group just finished #5 in the series last weekend, and now we are in a holding pattern waiting impatiently for the last one in the series. :-)

I always thought 3.5, and by extension as a carbon-copy game, Pathfinder, was a very broken rule system. We played 3.x for years, and the whole time understood how broken it was...especially prestige class abuse.

Since 4E has well defined, balanced rules...it gives more control of the story to the player. The player knows what to expect when they want to do something, rather than trying it and seeing what the DM makes up for difficulty. As such, 4E promotes better roleplaying and group storytelling.

When 5E flops for the 4E crowd. I want to have a game that plays very similar to 4E, but is legally not 4E for when WotC inevitably pulls the plug (because of their corporate background and lust for money)...

I agree with this sentiment. I have a strong dislike for D&D 3.x, and so never played nor will play Pathfinder (although one of my friends bought me the Pathfinder Starter Set as a gag gift). But I have played all other versions of D&D since the late 70's. I love 4E. I will be one of those in the 4E crowd watching 5E struggle.

Although I admitted that I don't like Pathfinder, I do like how Paizo understands and treats their customers. So I would like to have a company like Paizo pick up the dropped 4E as they did 3.5. Too bad that is a pipe dream.

In expanding Jezred's thoughts, there is a great kit in the Complete Bard's Handbook called 'Blademaster' (I think). This does just what he mentioned in taking away the instrument, but gives a nice spellcasting bard who is flashy with a sword.

Describing any iteration of D&D as a "version of PF" -- light or otherwise -- is profoundly bizarre.

This is so true. Since Pathfinder is a direct copy of 3rd Edition D&D with some homebrew rules thrown in. It makes me chuckle when people allude to D&D copying Pathfinder in any fashion.

Hmmm...so 13th age vs DDN... Tweet vs. Instead they did no real default setting--no matter what they said--and waited till the end for Ebberron.

I disagree on this point. They did have a default campaign setting, but they took too long to get good detail out on it. They also pretended it was a generic setting, where they should have put more into it up front.

A lot of products and novels have now detailed Nerath, and more specifically Nentir Vale. Both my current 4th Edition games take place there.

As for Ebberron...good riddance. This was a cheesy campaign from the start. It did give us some great things, like warforged.

Really liking what I am reading. So far WotC have my money for this game. Old school feel with simple mechanics. And as yet no battle mat or square counting!!! Yeh!

See, I still don't get this with the aversion to the battlemat. It is as if people think that 4E was the first version to use a battlemat. Back in the late 70's, the battlemat was used all the time. You still used it for movement, area effects, and range...plus just mini placement. 2nd Edition was the same.

The battlemat has been a necessity ever since the 2nd Edition Combat & Tactics. 3rd Edition (and Pathfinder) absolutely utilize a battlemat. 5-foot steps, movement, flanking, AOEs, etc all need them.

TotM proponents will argue "no we don't!" Sure you can get by without it. I run my 4E game without a mat sometimes. But combats with many opponents scattered about become confusing without it. But all versions of the game benefit from a grid.

Are wrote:

theroc wrote:

But with that couple dozen...almost NONE of them bought much of the rulebooks...if any. The characterbuilder did so well with printing the material, most created their character on someone else's account, and although they play every week...they have never bought a book. So I think that 4E was doing a lot better than the radar of book purchases showed. Again...a knee jerk reaction by WotC that I think will hurt them.

If I was in charge of a game company, I probably wouldn't consider a game where noone needs to actually purchase any of my products to be a success. If lots of people play 4E, but WotC don't sell any products to those people, then it makes perfect sense to create a new version with a different focus.

Yeah I was going to make a similar comment. IF you like 4E (or Pathfinder) the best way of showing it is with your wallet. From a business perspective, 500 newer players that enjoy your product but don't make purchases or only pirate material are worth a lot less than 10 older players who will religiously buy new books and materials.

Oh, I totally agree. And I hope my post didn't make it seemed like I think this ability to play without materials is a good thing. I think that so many gamers are notorious cheepskates (or just plain starving students). Remember back in the day when "T$R" was slammed for trying to make money? Heaven forbid! That is one reason why i purchased every single 4E product they put out. Granted, almost all of them are high quality product...but I bought them to support my game (and assuming I will use material in them all someday).

I think that 5th edition is a knee-jerk reaction on WotC part, and it is WAY too soon for a new edition. Understand that I strongly dislike Pathfinder...won't touch it because of the 3.5 rules roots. 3.5 was the only version of D&D that made me quit playing D&D, and I played since the late 70's. 4E surprised me at how well it was designed and brought me back. But that said, Pathfinder is very well written and illustrated by a company that loves its customers. Paizo deserves to do well just because of it's loyalty to its customers.

On the flip side, look at where Mike Mearls is leading D&D and I get depressed. Some of the things in D&D next are good ideas. But overall, I think that WotC was desperate to win back some of the customers who left for Pathfinder or other games, even though 4E did well in the market. So they jumped too soon into a new version. I don't predict this working. Pathfinder players are not going to abandon their game to go back to D&D. And Many 4E players are going to stick their (or play older versions). I predict that this is just going to fragment the marketshare once more.

Just a note on new players too...I have not personally seen so many new players in D&D that 4E brought in since the early 80's when 1st Edition was played by everyone. I have multiple groups of totally new players who stated D&D with 4E. But with that couple dozen...almost NONE of them bought much of the rulebooks...if any. The characterbuilder did so well with printing the material, most created their character on someone else's account, and although they play every week...they have never bought a book. So I think that 4E was doing a lot better than the radar of book purchases showed. Again...a knee jerk reaction by WotC that I think will hurt them.

Well, I didn't stop "rolling dice and roleplaying", but then I did that in Call of Cthulhu, Feng Shui, Gurps, Champions and many other systems and none of them felt like D&D to me.

Jeff, you caught me. I jumped ahead in my response to directly hit those things Edition Warriors complain about when saying 4E didn't feel like D&D (grid, roleplaying, etc). Your point of those don't affect other games feel is valid, and the point I was trying to make is simply that I have not heard a valid reason for "it doesn't feel like D&D because..." Thanks for keeping me honest.

Most of this really depends on the DM, and maybe some DMs had trouble adapting to the new system. When watching Chris Perkins DMing, it shows what can be done with the system.

Please don't take my comment as a slam on Pathfinder players. I think we should all be friends in the hobby we love. I am in the same boat as 3E players were...WotC also prematurely killed the version I enjoy (4E). So I will likely play 4E (and 1st and 2nd Edition) when D&D Next releases...unless it blows me away. Never know...I delayed looking at 4E for a while until I finally checked it out and was pleasantly surprised. And as great as Paizo has taken care and understood their customers, I wish my favorite version was in their hands, not WotC.

I remember that at a certain point I was totally confused by the way they kept telling me that the game would remain the same (with or without french accent) while at the same time changing it into something which didn't seem to have anything to do with the game I actually was playing.

I see these types of comments, but completely don't get it. I have been playing D&D since '79, and there was NOTHING in 4E that made it 'not D&D'. Did something happen that you stopped rolling dice and roleplaying? All the things that made up the D&D feel exist in every version. I very strongly dislike 3E. It was the only version of D&D that made me stop playing the game after 3.5 released. But that doesn't mean that it still didn't feel like D&D. They all do.

And before someone jumps in with "you need a grid", you can save that one. The grid has been a strong component of the game since 2nd Edition Players Options, and we have used minis since the beginning of D&D.

The problem is, as someone who beta-tested this for the last year, it was very well done and seemed to be coming along nicely. We ran quite a few things in it. They were just missing more images/tokens, but everything else looked great. Sad.

Kthulhu wrote:

Merciful Yog-Sothoth, why do people feel such a need to create drama?

because it's so much fun being able to say: "told ya so"

Those of us who gave 4e the pass can already do so,
if 5e falls as short of expectations as 4e we can do it again.

I guess I am not sure what you would be able to say "I told you so" about. In the end, we got 4th Edition, which is a vast improvement on D&D. While running a 3.5 campaign not long after its release, my group one night collectively threw our hands up in the air at how broken the rules were. We left D&D behind that night, we presumed for good, and moved back to Savage Worlds. After 4E had released, I grudgingly took a look at it and realized they fixed so much with it, I went happily back to D&D. I had not been as excited for the game since 1st Edition.

Do I think that WotC REALLY jumped the gun making a new edition so soon? Absolutely. This is becoming a bad habit with them. 3.0 made it 5 years. 3.5 made it only 3 years. Looks like 4E will make it about 5. They really need to slow down and focus on a single version. I don't plan to make the move to version 5, unless I am surprised more than I am by the playtest.

That said...I also need to point out that I have nothing against Pathfinder. It is very well written, great artwork, and the products are put together in a way that makes sense. I also believe that Paizo understands their customers far better. I am just not a 3.5 guy.

Then for whatever reason WOTC decided that they needed to get me back on board. I didn't ask them to but they are trying it anyways. I am sorry.

Pan, you make an important point I think WotC is gambling on (probably incorrectly). They think they can win people back over enough to change the revenue they are getting from 4E. How many Pathfinder gamers would leave Pathfinder because a new, shiny edition of 5E comes out? The best I think they can hope for is that some gamers adopt the 5E version into their collection of games. I run a few 4E games, and a handful of the players also play Pathfinder.

I love 4E, but that doesn't mean I don't play other versions. Heck, my group right now is playing DragonLance SAGA. But I don't think fragmenting the market again will generate more revenue than it will dilute it.

I first need to admit...I am not a fan of 3E. I had fun with it at first, but the more the OGL added and the further the game progressed, the more broken it seemed to become. Not long after 3.5 released, my gaming group collectively threw up our hands in frustration one game at how bad things had gotten and left D&D. Good thing Savage Worlds was there to take us on. We also had a great time going back to 2nd Edition. I had thought, at the time, that I was unfortunately done with D&D. Since I played since '79, this was depressing to me.

I did the Pathfinder playtest, and it was still just 3.5 to me. When 4E came out, I generally ignored it and kept playing older editions. Finally, I broke down and picked up the rules. I LOVED how they fixed consistency and lexicon. I loved that characters were no longer as cookie-cutter. I was an instant fan, and own every 4E product released to date. At the same time, I was confused about Pathfinder fans. They were so attached to their old version that they left D&D to stick with the old rules. (Remember, I thought 3E was pretty broken, anyway.) I never participated in 'Edition Wars', because I'm just glad we are all gamers and have that in common. But I did get into some tactful disagreements.

Wizards has since announced 5E. WAY too soon. Rather than putting efforts into their existing game, they think rebooting will win old customers. This reboot is as bad an idea as the Footloose reboot. Instead, they are simply going to fracture their customers even more. Pathfinder fans will still play Pathfinder. And guess what...many 4E fans will continue to play 4E.

This is where my apology comes into play. I now better understand the feeling of edition loyalty, and even the slight feeling of betrayal for moving on from something I enjoy and think works. I will likely be one of those who again stays with 4E when D&D Next releases. I will be one of the dissenting fragmenting customers. I have much more in common with the Pathfinder gamer now. I appreciate what you were faced with, and I am glad you had a company there to continue working on the version you loved. Wish 4E had a good benefactor to take over. But since there is enough material to keep us busy for decades...we are all good.

Pathfinder players...my friends...I understand you better and apologize for my previous pushback.

One thing to remember: 3e brought a lot of people that had stopped playing D&D all together back into the hobby. A bunch of us skipped 2e because it was "D&D: Disney Edition" and seemed to sanitized after the grittiness of AD&D 1e.

Dude, you skipped 2nd Edition?! Really!? I'm sorry. So the edition where much of the coolest stuff was born...Planescape, Spelljammers, most of the Realms detail...you missed. All 11 years? Wow. Again...sorry.

I had a similar, albeit shorter stint of D&D vacation. Although I own 3.5, my gaming group and I left after we realized how broken 3.5 was. Luckily, 4E was a fantastic version, and I have personally ushered dozens of new players...many who never did an RPG before, into the game.

The Ennies come down to a glorified online fan contest in most cases, and Pathfinder has some of the most rabid fans, whereas I've found most 4e fans don't really care about the Ennies.

I would agree on this. Just in my personal involvement, I DM two gaming groups, both 4E. One guy has played Pathfinder. Generally we show up, play the game, have fun, and buy the next 4E things coming out. But we don't have a fanfare around this generally. It's what we do. But Pathfinder fans seem to have more they want to prove. They are vocal and preaching about Pathfinder, where the 4E fan just plays on.

Vic, I now regret even bringing up the "edition wars" comment...because I didn't want that to detract from my intention of complimenting Paizo on doing things right with the customer. It is very noticeable.

I had not seen your blog post from before on "edition wars"...thank for linking it and helping lead the charge to steer the gaming industry away from internal strife. Again...just something Paizo is doing right.

It is so nice to go to events like Gen Con and see the camaraderie between gamers. Too bad so many turn into trolls on the internet.

My point was just that...awesome job...and I wish you guys were in charge of the other RPGs I play, too. :-)

After years of watching gaming companies evolve, including Paizo, and being in marketing by career trade, I have been impressed by Paizo’s interaction and connection to their consumer.

I need to first make a disclaimer…I don’t play Pathfinder. I have most of the books, because I am also a game collector. But I don’t play Pathfinder itself. I still dabble in all editions of D&D except 3.x. Still play some 1st, a lot of 2nd, and primarily 4th now (which I think is a great system). But out of our gaming group, 3.x is the only version we dislike enough to not play it. That doesn’t mean I think Pathfinder isn’t a great quality product…it absolutely is, which is why I own so many books just for the read. I just don’t like that specific version of D&D that it was spawned from.

That said…I follow the Paizo message boards just because it is a joy to see a gaming company so in touch with their customers. To gamers, many of us have an attachment to the designers/artists as much as the game itself. On Paizo’s website, these guys are frequent posters, jumping into conversations and giving feedback, mingling with the customer from designer to CEO. And I have watched it work. These guys really give up the time and you can see their interest in what consumer opinion is. By contrast, on the WotC site, you can beg and beg for feedback from someone within the company, and they will never show up. As if they are too good to mingle with the common gamer. As a result, the tone is completely different between the sites.

Paizo has done things mostly right all along the way. Right from the start, they implemented the huge playtest of the Pathfinder rules over the web. Immediately, fans suddenly felt ‘ownership’ and a stake in the new game. They were part of it and felt pride in it. Naturally when the product released, it already had a customer base. By contrast, consumers are usually blindsided and surprised by a WotC release.

The only thing I wish Paizo did better was to back off a bit on leading the “edition wars” charge, which you can see fostered in the message boards. We are all gamers, and hopefully we can get along in our hobby.

But overall, Paizo listens to the consumer, communicates to them, and responds accordingly. These guys just do it right. Wish more of the games I play were owned by Paizo so they would get the same support, and look forward to other products or games they release outside the Pathfinder realm. I just had to take the time to express my gratitude and respect for a company that just does it right.

I don't play Pathfinder, but the Condition Cards are such an amazing idea, and look great! I may try and use them in my Gamma World and 4E games, because many conditions match (they are still all d20 System after all), but there are just enough discrepancies to make it tricky.

Although the formatting could be better, I like the idea this guy made here:

http://www.dragonavenue.com/downloads/Condition_Cards_20080616.pdf

Kind of like nameplate tents showing your condition. Not as sleek and transportable as cards, but still.

deinol wrote:

Most non-gamers have heard of D&D.

Not true. Whenever I mention it to non-gamers, I get blank stares.

REALLY? Who are you talking with? You need to start talking to people Jr High age or older then.

Hello. I've created a D&D version poll at http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/525417.

I did it out of curiosity sake.
It's not policed so no ballot stuffing please

Have you advertised your poll on other boards as well? Because if it was just mentioned on Paizo.com, your responses will be quite skewed. :-)

let's not get too off topic here. :) Anyway, are you finding it easier to find Pthfinder playerz?

booger=boy

Then I guess the simple answer is "No". :-)

I have seen this argument from both camps (sad isn't it...that gamers are divided like a political party), but I wouldn't believe what either side said unless someone had access to full sales of both (which would not be shared information). This all keeps coming back to "this reseller said" and "this game shop thinks", which will change depending on who you talk to.

Either way, the point was more market share than sales. How many people play the game? I won't have any numbers more than anyone else would, but all you need to do is walk through the Pathfinder vs. D&D gaming areas at a neutral con to get an idea.

Pathfinder offers the kind of character customization you just can't get in the 4E pseudo-MMO style, and Paizo has succeeded in not just revamping the old 3.5 rules, but coming up with a variety of flavorful additions to them.

The streamlining also makes it a lot easier for new players to pick up and play, and the system is much less combat-centric than 4E, which appeals a lot more to the roleplayers.

Really?!? Where do people keep getting this info? From someone who owns ALL 4E products and ALL Pathfinder products..this is just hogwash. What kind of customization do you get in Pathfinder over 4E? Pathfinder is similar to the D&D Essentials line, where you have basic cookie-cutter classes, where you basically get the same powers at each level. You get to custom feats and a few other things. Not saying there is anything wrong with that...but that is the nature of character. D&D 4E has you pick your feats as well, but you pick your powers/abilities from a large pool at each level. Like it or not, that is not less customization.

And what would make D&D more 'combat-centric'? If you have a lot of combat, then it is the nature of your specific adventure and the style of your GM. There is no rules element dictating how much combat vs. roleplaying is in a game. This is the same whether it is D&D, Pathfinder, Savage Worlds, or Hackmaster. (Well, OK...Hackmaster. :-)

I know of one group who plays Pathfinder (well...they used to...they moved to Gamma World now). I personally know of well over a dozen local groups who play D&D.

Larger market share than D&D...right. First...find me this quote by the "CEO" before I would believe it (it is an edition warrior's urban legend). I doubt you would find anyone on Paizo staff who would believe such nonsense. And I think they are fine with that...they run with a much leaner staff, and are doing OK.

Either way, a game based on the old 3.5 rule-set is bound to happen eventually, given enough time, one will spring up.

There is...D&D Online uses 3.5 rules. Well...sort of. They changed it for MMO purposes. But the core ruleset it uses is 3.5.

The old SSI games based in AD&D back in the 90's were great for matching the rules of the game, and unfortunately DDO doesn't match 3.5 as well as that.

In fact, I still play those old SSI games.

I have always hated errata's. (Which was one of the reasons I did not like 3.5 when it released...basically a big errata you buy.) My thoughts have always been...those are the rules...now deal around it. Hardly anyone likes nerfs in their MMO...which you are forced to comply with. At least you are not forced to comply with errata. That way, the gaming group is not split into two (or more) versions they are using.

I think a video game is inevitable as Pathfinder gains additional market share.

Gains additional marketshare...over what? Pathfinder's core market is made of a group of devoted 3.5 players who did not want to transition to the new version of the game. So Pathfinder's market had it's initial influx of players when it released, and I am betting has remained stable since then. 4E players are not generally converting to Pathfinder, and likewise not many Pathfinder are going to go to 4E. So it is probably safe to say that Pathfinder is not gaining 4E's marketshare. So any market gains are only to new players in the game.

And as compelling as the "yeah...it is a game, based on an old version of a game, which when to a new version, spawned this spin-off. We went to this version because we didn't want our old rules to change, which they did with Pathfinder. And we didn't want to buy our products all over again...which uh...we did when Pathfinder products came out." From what I have seen at conventions, the new influx of Pathfinder gamers is not great.

So unless a real study on marketshare or sales is made public, I just don't see this.

Interesting wizoroc, sorry to threadjack but what makes you feel that 4th is so much closer to 1st?

It wasn't so much the game is similar, just the feeling. We started with basic D&D, then moved to Advanced D&D. At the time, everything was so new and exciting with the game. It was easy to get new players in, and there was a simplicity in the setting (you laugh, but it comes from a serious lack of material at the time, I think).

With 4th Edition, it felt like a new girlfriend again. To be fair, we were excited about 3rd Edition, but not the same...mostly because it signed the death certificate on Alternity, SAGA and some other games that frustrated us. But then 3.5 seemed like a regurgitation of rules that should have been a errata, and all the 3rd party stuff muddied the water. 3.x was like a slut who would sleep with anybody. :-)

So I think having a fresh start, with a version of the game that was the most consistent of any version this far, is why I say we have been more excited about 4th Edition than any version since 1st. Again, sorry if this is threadjacking....just replying. And to restate, I do appreciate the love and attention Paizo put into Pathfinder. But just like country music...3.x is not for me.

I played D&D ever since Jr High, starting in 1980. I have always been a D&D fan and played non-stop until...3.5. Really...they made a version 3.5? That is not even a version...that is an attempted bug fix. :-)

We moved over to 3rd edition and played through a number of campaigns, then when 3.5 came out we played some more until one day we all stopped during a game and discussed "What the hell are we playing this crap for?" It was such a disjointed game at that point, and corrupted by so many other d20 products. Easily the worst release of D&D so far. We all decided then to drop and go back to 2nd edition.

So it is interesting that of all the games Pathfinder spins off of, it was the run down, busted up 3.5. That said, the Pathfinder stuff is nice. They did a great job with what they had to work with and cleaned it up and the products look great. In the end though, it is still 3.5.

On the flip side, we all tried 4E and loved it. Not since 1st edition have the old time gamers been this much into D&D, and it has been so easy to get new players into it (ones that had never even did an RPG before) that a few other gaming groups have spawned because of the influx of new players.

I like what Pathfinder has done. They released a slick product. But I can't devolve back to 3.5, so I have stuck with 4E.

Yeah, this just looks plain bad. Every bad stereotype is flashed by in a short trailer. Just at what point did people believe the typical gamer dresses in costume?