Are you trying to get spanked, monkey boy?
Let's just say I am cranky, and it is stormy, and I'm ready to rumble!
I still don't see why we shouldn't call Pathfinder D&D. It plays just like D&D 3.5, it has pretty much every significant element from D&D 3.5, it was crafted in order to be almost completely compatible with D&D 3.5 supplements, it contains all the sacred cows that D&D 3.5 kept from the earlier editions, et cetera. It is a refined version of D&D 3.5, which is what makes it great for all of those who wanted to stay in that edition. You can, of course, call it Pathfinder, because it is Pathfinder, but the way I see it, Pathfinder is now the name of the newest edition of D&D, created in parallel to 4e. Both games are D&D, just different subsets of the game.
Is it the "real D&D"? I'm not sure what would that mean, since all editions are derivated games from the first one. OD&D plays very differently from 3.5, so technically the only real D&D is the original one. 4e is also D&D, just with a larged degree of derivation than previous editions. But if we are going to call 3.5 D&D, then we might as well say that Pathfinder is another edition of D&D, because that is exactly what it is.
And about using the name D&D, it is not clinging due to nostalgia; it is a way of identifying a very particular type of roleplaying game. When you say "Let's play D&D", everyone gets a pretty clear image of what to expect, unlike what would happen if you said "Let's play a game of medieval high fantasy".
|
I still don't see why we shouldn't call Pathfinder D&D.
Because it isn't D&D. It's Pathfinder. There are lots of games that play just like 3.5 and aren't considered D&D. The pen and paper version of World of Warcraft is as much a 3.5 derivitive as Pathfinder is, but I have never met anyone who wanted to call that D&D. Furthermore, you are makig the argument that I had about 3E not being D&D. 3E did not play like the games that came before, so perhaps we should not count it as D&D as well.
|
Actually, in Italy , the law only allows you to sell two types of Neapolitan pizza as actual pizzas: Marinara and Margherita. They have to have the exact same ingredients and shape. Otherwise, it cannot be sold as traditional pizza. So, if you made it octogonal, even though that for all purposes it is the same pizza, you are not allowed to sell it as traditional.
Where did you hear that? I've had pizza of all shapes and arrangements in Italy. That might be a local law in one particular city or locality - that wouldn't surprise me, I suppose.[/threadjack]
Anyway, getting away from the pizza threadjack and back to the "can we call Pathfinder D&D" threadjack, I support calling it just Pathfinder to celebrate a game that is making its own way, and doesn't need to be tied to anything in order to be legitimate. I feel like "Pathfinder D&D" or "3.P" etc somehow suggests that Pathfinder cannot stand on its own without a qualifier, which I think is not true.
MWAHAHAHAHAHA peoples do like the pain here!!
I still don't see why we shouldn't call Pathfinder D&D. It plays just like D&D 3.5, it has pretty much every significant element from D&D 3.5, it was crafted in order to be almost completely compatible with D&D 3.5 supplements, it contains all the sacred cows that D&D 3.5 kept from the earlier editions, et cetera. It is a refined version of D&D 3.5, which is what makes it great for all of those who wanted to stay in that edition.
Is it the "real D&D"? I'm not sure what would that mean, since all editions are derivated games from the first one. OD&D plays very differently from 3.5, so technically the only real D&D is the original one. 4e is also D&D, just with a larged degree of derivation than previous editions. But if we are going to call 3.5 D&D, then we might as well say that Pathfinder is another edition of D&D, because that is exactly what it is.
And about using the name D&D, it is not clinging due to nostalgia; it is a way of identifying a very particular type of roleplaying game. When you say "Let's play D&D", everyone gets a pretty clear image of what to expect, unlike what would happen if you said "Let's play a game of medieval high fantasy".
I will refer you to my first and third bullet points in my previous post. Call it whatever you like. Call it a purple cow. Personally, I have found more non-playing people identify with 'RPG' as a generic term than 'D&D'. Especially the WoW Generation. BUT IT IS NOT ANOTHER EDITION OF D&D. It just isn't, legally or morally. I can call an adhesive wound dressing a Band-Aid, but I better not claim that my favorite adhesive wound strip is the 'real' Band-Aid unless that's what it says on the label.
Look at my Charter membership tag. I have been with Paizo on this for the whole ride, ever since Dragon and Dungeon went digital. I love Pathfinder. What I DON'T love is this CONSTANT back and forth about whose game is the D&Diest.
Actually, in Italy , the law only allows you to sell two types of Neapolitan pizza as actual pizzas: Marinara and Margherita. They have to have the exact same ingredients and shape. Otherwise, it cannot be sold as traditional pizza. So, if you made it octogonal, even though that for all purposes it is the same pizza, you are not allowed to sell it as traditional.Where did you hear that? I've had pizza of all shapes and arrangements in Italy. That might be a local law in one particular city or locality - that wouldn't surprise me, I suppose.[/threadjack]
|
|
ThisActually, in Italy , the law only allows you to sell two types of Neapolitan pizza as actual pizzas: Marinara and Margherita. They have to have the exact same ingredients and shape. Otherwise, it cannot be sold as traditional pizza. So, if you made it octogonal, even though that for all purposes it is the same pizza, you are not allowed to sell it as traditional.Where did you hear that? I've had pizza of all shapes and arrangements in Italy. That might be a local law in one particular city or locality - that wouldn't surprise me, I suppose.[/threadjack]
Ahh. So it's only a proposal at this point. That would explain the disconnect.
Ahh. So it's only a proposal at this point. That would explain the disconnect.ThisActually, in Italy , the law only allows you to sell two types of Neapolitan pizza as actual pizzas: Marinara and Margherita. They have to have the exact same ingredients and shape. Otherwise, it cannot be sold as traditional pizza. So, if you made it octogonal, even though that for all purposes it is the same pizza, you are not allowed to sell it as traditional.Where did you hear that? I've had pizza of all shapes and arrangements in Italy. That might be a local law in one particular city or locality - that wouldn't surprise me, I suppose.[/threadjack]
It appears that way.
Futile Monkey business in the form of Bullet Points
Oh and Mairkurion{tm}?
** spoiler omitted **
Patrick, here's why your arguments (and Tina's and Fryer's) are mirror images of the futile argumentation of the side you're arguing against: Their purpose is not to answer the question, "What counts as D&D in the legal realm?" They don't care about that question or the criteria that are applied to answer the question, therefore it doesn't matter how right you are in your pursuit of this question and the appropriate application of criteria. Sure, if they were the subject of a lawsuit, they would suddenly develop a healthy interest in your arguments, if they knew what what was good for them.
Two (at least) different purposes, corresponding sets of opposing criteria, resulting in the impossibility of commensurate arguments, perhaps frustration, and a lot of posts that accomplish nothing. I say nothing...I get to show off something I learned! All hail W. B. Gallie and J. R. Lucas!
Patrick, here's why your arguments (and Tina's and Fryer's) are mirror images of the futile argumentation of the side you're arguing against:
You are right. Let me try this. Pathfinder is really WoW! It's meant to be played by munchkins! Run while you still can, they are coming for your books! D&D is dead! Dig as deep as you can so that you will be safe when the sky falls! The trolls are coming! The trolls are coming! Is that better?
Futile Monkey business in the form of Bullet Points
Oh and Mairkurion{tm}?
** spoiler omitted **
Patrick, here's why your arguments (and Tina's and Fryer's) are mirror images of the futile argumentation of the side you're arguing against: Their purpose is not to answer the question, "What counts as D&D in the legal realm?" They don't care about that question or the criteria that are applied to answer the question, therefore it doesn't matter how right you are in your pursuit of this question and the appropriate application of criteria. Sure, if they were the subject of a lawsuit, they would suddenly develop a healthy interest in your arguments, if they knew what what was good for them.
Two (at least) different purposes, corresponding sets of opposing criteria, resulting in the impossibility of commensurate arguments, perhaps frustration, and a lot of posts that accomplish nothing. I say nothing...I get to show off something I learned! All hail W. B. Gallie and J. R. Lucas!
As always you are the voice of reason Mairkurion.
***
GET HIM!
***
Seriously, I just get tired of the bloody shirt waving, the breast beating, the 'WotC stabbed me in the back and stomped on my dog's coccyx' arguments. Of COURSE we are arguing apples and oranges. It's the internet, this sh!t's IMPORTANT!
You are right. Let me try this. Pathfinder is really WoW! It's meant to be played by munchkins! Run while you still can, they are coming for your books! D&D is dead! Dig as deep as you can so that you will be safe when the sky falls! The trolls are coming! The trolls are coming! Is that better?
Patrick, here's why your arguments (and Tina's and Fryer's) are mirror images of the futile argumentation of the side you're arguing against:
I just about died laughing. Thanks, that was a good one. :D
I just about died laughing. Thanks, that was a good one. :DYou are right. Let me try this. Pathfinder is really WoW! It's meant to be played by munchkins! Run while you still can, they are coming for your books! D&D is dead! Dig as deep as you can so that you will be safe when the sky falls! The trolls are coming! The trolls are coming! Is that better?
Patrick, here's why your arguments (and Tina's and Fryer's) are mirror images of the futile argumentation of the side you're arguing against:
Bows Thank you.
Better how, Tina? (The how/for what is the center of my point.)
Bold font is easy on the eyes...but I never really liked the looks of italics with that font. Also, I like exclamation marks and the words "troll" and "munchkin".
Pat, if you're tired of them, don't read them! ;P
Better how, Tina? (The how/for what is the center of my point.)
Maybe more appropriate is a more apt term then better.
Pat, if you're tired of them, don't read them! ;P
It never starts bad. I got sucked into this useless gripe fest because I simply pointed out that the IP-forbidden monsters are still perfectly usable with a few tweaks in Pathfinder. I myself am running an entire PbP GAME on these boards that is pure 2E Planescape fluff with Pathfinder rules. I converted a module in about three hours, from 2E to PF. (including updated virtual maps)
Now, once again, thanks to the 'I have to be playing D&D or it just isn't the same' crowd, liberally mixed with the 'WotC betrayed us and Paizo is the true inheritor of the D&D crown' crowd, I am throughly disgusted and getting lots of fun burn marks on my head fur.
***
Plus, I'll promise not to look anymore if you keep out of the playtest threads :P
Breath Patrick, breath.
Breath Patrick, breath.
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.....
Namastes and centers himself
OK, enough useless anger. The Green Man is right, we will never come to an accomidation on this, so I will let it go ...
Pat, if you're tired of them, don't read them! ;PIt never starts bad.
***
Plus, I'll promise not to look anymore if you keep out of the playtest threads :P
How many times in life that first sentence has damned me to great suffering!
OH NO! No fair, I didn't see this post until after I had posted!
--------
Tiny, yes...I think you see what I'm saying.
Seriously, I just get tired of the bloody shirt waving, the breast beating, the 'WotC stabbed me in the back and stomped on my dog's coccyx' arguments. Of COURSE we are arguing apples and oranges. It's the internet, this sh!t's IMPORTANT!
I think that is a specific subgroup of people. I don't think WotC stabbed anyone in the back; I actually got hefty collection of 4e books, and I have a very positive impression of it, and specially thankful of the excellent DMing tools provided. The reason I decided to move onto Pathfinder, however, was that, as a group, we decided that we were more comfortable with the way 3.5 handled things, even considering all its quirks and issues (some of which were very nicely worked out with Pathfider, while others remained).
One thing is to legally consider Pathfinder appart from the D&D brand, which it is. Pathfinder is built over the OGL and does not use any registered WotC IP. So in front of the law, Pathfinder is not D&D. However, I'm speaking in practical terms: If you took the SRD out of D&D 3.5, what are you left with? Beholders, Ilithids, the names Bigby and Mordenkainen, a handful of gods and that's pretty much it. The core of D&D 3.5 is the SRD, which is exactly the same core as Pathfinder, just with more stuff built upon it. It was no accident nor coincidence: The whole idea here was to offer a continuity of the 3.5 design philosophy to people that either didn't like 4e or just liked 3.5 more than 4e (hey, some people seem to either be able to hate or love one edition at a time. I'm have fun playing either AD&D 2e, 3.5 or 4e, though if I had to choose between the three, I would pick up 3.5).
As I said in my previous post, if we are willing to say that 3.5 is D&D, then we have to admit Pathfinder is also D&D, because Pathfinder is 3.5 taken to the next level. The problem with calling Pathfinder Purple Cow or Band Aid is that it doesn't really share anything with either of those. We could potentially say that 3.5 is not D&D, because, effectively, it is quite a different game than OD&D. If that was the case, then we could say that Pathfinder is not D&D, because Pathfinder is 3.5++, but that wouldn't change the point I'm trying to make: Pathfinder is the continuation of 3.5. So if we say 3.5 was the continuation of D&D, then Pathfinder is the continuation of D&D as well, just not "officially" like 4e.
I'm not trying to cling to a name, undervalue Pathfinder or imply that 4e is not D&D. What I am trying to say is that, from an objective point of view, I don't see enough differences between Pathfinder and 3.5 to say that the former is not as part of the D&D whole as the later. And subjectively, I really feel no difference between playing a 3.5 campaign and a Pathfinder campaign, besides all the extra goodies the later brought to the game, as both games are aimed at accomplishing the exact same thing in pretty much the exact same way (but with more streamlined mechanics, enriched classes, rebalancing of various things, extra/different feats, and so on. It's like playing a really houseruled game, but not as far as, say, Arcana Evolved or Iron Heroes).
And that is exactly why I like Pathfinder: They are not trying to sell me another game altogether, but neither selling me the same thing; they are selling me a refreshing, rethought, and reformulated version of the D&D I like the most.
I do apologise if I sound nitpicky, knuckleheaded or anything of sorts; please be sure that is not my intention. I simply wish to explain the objective reasons why I think Pathfinder is another incarnation of D&D. I don't think it is the "better" or the "real" D&D; I think it is another version, which of course it's going to feel much better to those that enjoyed 3.5 more than other versions, but that is threading into the realms of tastes and opinions.
|
|
Is Yo Gabba Gabba on the take? I just watched a cartoon with my daughter about some grumpy wizards who lived in a tower on the seashore and don't want anyone to have fun. Is that a secret message that Christian Jacobs and Scott Schultz are secretly Paizo fanboys, or am I reading to much into it?
Edit: Maybe Christian Jacobs is James Jacobs' brother!
Double Edit: I guess not
stuff
Klaus, I am not pointing at you when I am talking about these things. Nor am I asking you to call Pathfinder 'purple cow' or 'Band-Aid.'
What I was trying to get across was the point that, despite Pathfinder being based on D&D mechanics released as open content as part of the great monument that is the OGL, it is not D&D. It shares many similarities to D&D, yes. We share a lot of similarities to chimpanzees, including 96% of our genetic code. We are descended from a common ancestor. I don't think you would call a human a chimpanzee just because of these facts. That's all I am saying.
An adhesive strip is usually called a Band-Aid. A photostatic copy is a Xerox. A nose tissue is a Kleenex. But you are not allowed to use those names to 'brand' your product if you are selling a generic equivalent. They belong to the companies that own them. Of course, in the course of your life no one is going to care if you call them Band-Aids, Kleenexes or Xeroxes.
The Paizo designers want you to call it Pathfinder. The 4E D&D players want you to call it Pathfinder. I want you to call it Pathfinder. Why not just call it Pathfinder? The sooner it develops its own 'brand recogntion' the better off the game system will be.
The Paizo designers want you to call it Pathfinder. The 4E D&D players want you to call it Pathfinder. I want you to call it Pathfinder. Why not just call it Pathfinder? The sooner it develops its own 'brand recogntion' the better off the game system will be.
Oh, on that I agree. I see it pretty much like when my parents used to call every console "Nintendo", but come the late 90's they started calling everything "Playstation". Now my mother calls everything "Wii" (bought her one and she has grown quite fond of it, specially Wii Fit).
With time I'm sure it will come to be known just as Pathfinder, probably with a Pathfinder 2e and 3e in the years to come. What I was aiming at was that, as a group, my regular players and I always keep a spot for our "current D&D campaign", which at different times has been occupied by basically all editions of the game, and right now it is making its transition into Pathfinder. And we love it because it feels like playing the same thing, but much improved.
I've always seen the name D&D as a way of playing, more than just a specific game or edition, with a very distinct kind of "roleplaying culture" associated with it. It is what I see D&D meaning as a whole.
I do not call it D&D, rather to me it is a d20 system called Pathfinder RPG. And whether you want to call it D&D or even can call it D&D legally (which you can't), Paizo themselves only refer to PFRPG as an upgrade to 3.5 in their ads, not an update to D&D or a replacement. And if you look at the document properties of the pdf for the core book, the info there directly labels it as d20. So it is simple, while PFRPG may be the spiritual successor to D&D 3.5 rather than the direct successor (which is 4E), it is more properly a d20 fantasy gaming system that is the love child of the OGL/SRD and Paizo.
it is more properly a d20 fantasy gaming system that is the love child of the OGL/SRD and Paizo.
Don't forget Santa Claus. I'm sure his DNA was used somewhere in there, too.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Their purpose is not to answer the question, "What counts as D&D in the legal realm?" They don't care about that question or the criteria that are applied to answer the question, therefore it doesn't matter how right you are in your pursuit of this question and the appropriate application of criteria.
+1 Legally Pathfinder isn't D&D (and shouldn't be) but morally it is pure D&D and WotC no longer produces any products similar to D&D in any form other than carrying the name (which it doesn't deserve.)
Their purpose is not to answer the question, "What counts as D&D in the legal realm?" They don't care about that question or the criteria that are applied to answer the question, therefore it doesn't matter how right you are in your pursuit of this question and the appropriate application of criteria.+1 Legally Pathfinder isn't D&D (and shouldn't be) but morally it is pure D&D and WotC no longer produces any products similar to D&D in any form other than carrying the name (which it doesn't deserve.)
Did you miss all the posts here pointing out how juvenile it is to pull the whole "WotC has betrayed the D&D name!" shtick? I realize that you're part of the "There is only One True D&D and 4e is just a pretender to the throne!" crowd, but the vast majority of gamers don't see it that way, and pushing it on them (to the point of actually correcting them on it, which you admitted you'd do) is downright obnoxious. It makes you look like a total elitist, which I'm sure is not how you're trying to come off.
At least the people arguing for calling all versions of D&D (including Pathfinder) "D&D" have a real basis for that, as do the people arguing for calling Pathfinder "Pathfinder" and D&D "D&D". Your claim to calling Pathfinder "D&D" essentially boils down to "The version of the game I like the most is the One True D&D!"
My current frustration with this is trying to get any response at all from Wizards. I'm trying to figure out if I can recreate a number of the cleric Domains found in their accessory books to follow Pathfinder rules. I've sent 3 certified letters to their law group (which is where I was directed by their customer service) and they haven't even deemed me worthy of a response. I want to publish these new Domains but I refuse to do it without making sure that I can. I'm not willing to put my personal finances and such on the line for that (I'm obviously a very small publisher.. :) ) I just wish I could get some sort of response of direction from them. If anyone has had any success with this please tell me how you did it, as I am currently running into a thick stone wall.As a part of a large corporation that is (justifiably) very protective of its IP, they will be extremely reluctant to provide you with legal advice regarding their IP. You should not be contacting their law department on this. You should speak, personally, to a lawyer. Not one of theirs. Just a lawyer familiar with IP law, and who can determine exactly what WotC can and cannot legally bar you from doing with their game system, and who can advise you on whether it's worth pursuing the path you want to take.
You're absolutely right, and thanks for the tip. The problem is, I'm having trouble finding said lawyer (since I prefer to discuss such things face to face) and until my own publishing company begins to pay off, I am rather limited on funds. But that is a balance I will have to figure out. Again, thanks for the advice.
|
I realize that you're part of the "There is only One True D&D and 4e is just a pretender to the throne!" crowd, but the vast majority of gamers don't see it that way, and pushing it on them (to the point of actually correcting them on it, which you admitted you'd do) is downright obnoxious. It makes you look like a total elitist, which I'm sure is not how you're trying to come off.
I hate to be the one to say this, but..."Pot, meet kettle." You don't exactly come off sounding humble and contrite.
Hi Scott, are we in a 4ed thread ?
I know it's wrong, but that did make me laugh.
You can always do the conversion and then destribute to people interested via other means?
Not sure how that stands up in association/legal areas or paizo guys comfortable zone?
I call it The Game. Anyone who refuses to call it the game, meet me at the entrance to the Northwood Hills neighborhood of North Dallas, and we'll settle this the only way it can be settled. I'll know it's you and what you're there for if you say, "Chuck, I refuse to call it The Game, and I'm here to kick your ass."
The Game
I believe I just lost.
You only lost the mental part. You'll really only feel the true hurt of loss if you go to Northwood Hills, and yell really loudly, "Screw you Chuck, I refuse to call things your way! Come out and fight me like a man!" Better yet, use a bullhorn, in case I'm taking a nap.
|
|
You're absolutely right, and thanks for the tip. The problem is, I'm having trouble finding said lawyer (since I prefer to discuss such things face to face) and until my own publishing company begins to pay off, I am rather limited on funds. But that is a balance I will have to figure out. Again, thanks for the advice.My current frustration with this is trying to get any response at all from Wizards. I'm trying to figure out if I can recreate a number of the cleric Domains found in their accessory books to follow Pathfinder rules. I've sent 3 certified letters to their law group (which is where I was directed by their customer service) and they haven't even deemed me worthy of a response. I want to publish these new Domains but I refuse to do it without making sure that I can. I'm not willing to put my personal finances and such on the line for that (I'm obviously a very small publisher.. :) ) I just wish I could get some sort of response of direction from them. If anyone has had any success with this please tell me how you did it, as I am currently running into a thick stone wall.As a part of a large corporation that is (justifiably) very protective of its IP, they will be extremely reluctant to provide you with legal advice regarding their IP. You should not be contacting their law department on this. You should speak, personally, to a lawyer. Not one of theirs. Just a lawyer familiar with IP law, and who can determine exactly what WotC can and cannot legally bar you from doing with their game system, and who can advise you on whether it's worth pursuing the path you want to take.
This may sound wierd but try listening to your local AM radio stations. Some of them, like the one we have here, run legal advice shows at some point during the week. You might be able to get some help that way.
The GameI believe I just lost.
Hahahahahahahaha, I actually get it, lol ;)
I hate to be the one to say this, but..."Pot, meet kettle." You don't exactly come off sounding humble and contrite.I realize that you're part of the "There is only One True D&D and 4e is just a pretender to the throne!" crowd, but the vast majority of gamers don't see it that way, and pushing it on them (to the point of actually correcting them on it, which you admitted you'd do) is downright obnoxious. It makes you look like a total elitist, which I'm sure is not how you're trying to come off.
That doesn't make my point any less valid. I certainly don't get up in arms trying to tell people that my D&D is the only real D&D and that everyone else is doing it wrong.
The Game is also a Holmesian term. (Or Sherlockian. But people who say Sherlockian are WRONG!)
The Game is also a Holmesian term. (Or Sherlockian. But people who say Sherlockian are WRONG!)
I'm afraid you're wrong on both counts. It's D&Dian.
|
|
That doesn't make my point any less valid. I certainly don't get up in arms trying to tell people that my D&D is the only real D&D and that everyone else is doing it wrong.I hate to be the one to say this, but..."Pot, meet kettle." You don't exactly come off sounding humble and contrite.I realize that you're part of the "There is only One True D&D and 4e is just a pretender to the throne!" crowd, but the vast majority of gamers don't see it that way, and pushing it on them (to the point of actually correcting them on it, which you admitted you'd do) is downright obnoxious. It makes you look like a total elitist, which I'm sure is not how you're trying to come off.
And I never said it invalidated your point. But to some people you tend to come across as a little condescending, which certainly doesn't help calm things down.