|
I and my group call it Pathfinder. End of discussion. That's it's name so that's what we call it. I started palying back in 1983 just as the little paper books were being phased out and the D&D sets and AD&D books were coming in. When 2E came out you had people grumble "It's not really D&D becasue there is no assasin and the illusionist is no longer a seperate class. When 3E came out some of the old schoolers grumbled that it wasn't D&D because non humans can go up as many levels as humans and humans can multiclass and only Hackmaster(TM Kenzer & Co.) REALLY carrys the Legacy of Gary Gygax. Now you have detractors to 4E doing the same thing. I have no like for 4E either but I am not going to neither bash it nor it's players, either.
I will say that I have the same issues with 4E that many 4E haters do (the reaons have been said by others ad nauseum, so I won't repeat them) but people can play what they like. I did attempt Hackmaster (aka HM) before trying Pathfinder but when inquirng about the game on the Kenzer boards the rabid HM fans basically said that if I needed to inquire about it then I don't deserve to play it and that I shouldn't play anyway because I wasn't there from the beginning of it and only people from the beginning are the one's who should be playing it. Therefore, I decided not to persue it further because of the rabid fans. Later, I did get a chance to read through the rules but the damage was done. It looks like I wasted your time enough already!
Bottom line: We call it Pathfinder.
Every Wednesday for the past seven years, I have run a game at my house. We started off playing 3.5 but switched to Pathfinder when we released the Beta. Yet, I still find myself saying things like, "See you at D&D next Wednesday!" or "Hey, I am going to have to cancel D&D this week." I usually catch myself and am really trying to say "Pathfinder," but it's like the word Kleenex to me. I haven't bought a Kleenex brand tissue for a long time, preferring the Kirkland brand tissues from Costco, but I always ask Vic to pass me a kleenex. And I'll probably keep using D&D, even though I know we are playing Pathfinder.
You now what they say about old dogs and new tricks...
:)
-Lisa
I'm in the same boat. I've been playing D&D for years, but the worlds have always been my own home-brewed worlds, even if I happily imported things from any of several branded lines or even other game systems, such as Arduin.
Pathfinder is a continuation of that for me. It's a lingua franca for gamers who may possibly have another system as their favorite but are able to agree upon it as a happy medium, mixed with a lot of players who now find it their personal favorite.
I never liked GM because it both sounded like a car company and it sounded too generic. I liked that WW called its GM a Storyteller because it stressed that aspect. The CoC Crypt Keeper or whatever it is was flavorful if a bit pretentious.
And while Dungeon Master is trademarked, trademarks don't matter in the land of reality where people aren't selling a product. I use Kleenex, even if it's some other brand. I'm a dungeon master, even if it's not an official trademarked rulebook I have in my hand. And characters in books can use brand name products or even call generic items by brand names and it doesn't matter.
We tend to use "pathfinder" and "DnD" interchangeably. Pathfinder I consider a form of DnD, because it is so derivative of 3.5 When we talk about 4E in our group, we never refer to it as "Dungeons and Dragons". I think this is mostly because 4E threw out so much of the baby with the bath water, that our group just doesn't cognitively connect those rules with "DnD". Pathfinder is our preferred system as well, so we tend to have to refer to 4E by its edition name, to specify it as the "version we don't play".
Its sort of akin to the Shadowrun XBox game. I'd never consider that game an authentic portrayal of the shadowrun universe because it was so divorced from the rules and lore it derived from. They can paste "shadowrun" on the cover, but that's almost the only thing I recognize about it. The magic works completely differently. There are no orks. The timeline doesn't mesh. etc.
Conversely, when I moved from 2E to 3E, there were enough sacred cows and recognizable elements that I incorporated it as an update to the rules, rather than a different system. It was an update that was needed, that brought the game in line with other more current games, and were faithful to the experience. On the surface it seemed to add more than it changed, although in truth it changed a lot about the game.
In the end how the public consumes your medium is up to them, and they really decide what "DnD" really is, whether its a specific system, or a genre of games, or family of games with the same ancestry.
We tend to use "pathfinder" and "DnD" interchangeably. Pathfinder I consider a form of DnD, because it is so derivative of 3.5 When we talk about 4E in our group, we never refer to it as "Dungeons and Dragons". I think this is mostly because 4E threw out so much of the baby with the bath water, that our group just doesn't cognitively connect those rules with "DnD". Pathfinder is our preferred system as well, so we tend to have to refer to 4E by its edition name, to specify it as the "version we don't play".
Its sort of akin to the Shadowrun XBox game. I'd never consider that game an authentic portrayal of the shadowrun universe because it was so divorced from the rules and lore it derived from. They can paste "shadowrun" on the cover, but that's almost the only thing I recognize about it. The magic works completely differently. There are no orks. The timeline doesn't mesh. etc.
Conversely, when I moved from 2E to 3E, there were enough sacred cows and recognizable elements that I incorporated it as an update to the rules, rather than a different system. It was an update that was needed, that brought the game in line with other more current games, and were faithful to the experience. On the surface it seemed to add more than it changed, although in truth it changed a lot about the game.
In the end how the public consumes your medium is up to them, and they really decide what "DnD" really is, whether its a specific system, or a genre of games, or family of games with the same ancestry.
I should clarify that in speaking for "our group" I may have misspoke. Some people feel the way I do, some feel less strongly. At least one person in our group (our kick@ss barabarian, Serwë) plays 4E with some other friends regularly.
In any case I don't think that 4E is a bad game. Its actually got some pretty neat things going on (like no 15-minute-adventuring-day). Its just not the version of DnD think of when I think of DnD. Please treat my comment above with <grognard> tags.
|
I was just curious. When you play Pathfinder do you actually call it Pathfinder or do you call it D&D?
So when gathering your friends for a game; do you say "can you make it on Sunday to play Pathfinder?" or do you say "can you make it on Sunday to play D&D?"
I'll start first. My group still calls it D&D.
We call it D&D, in large part because we're using every 3.5 supplement we have access to and our campaign is set in the Forgotten Realms.
I may be joining a new campaign set in a homebrew world with Pathfinder rules. The other books that are available will probably determine what I call it.
When the kids ask to play D&D, I pull out Pathfinder.
When I am getting together with adults to play, it's Pathfinder.
|
It amuses me that so many people consider 4E to be "Dungeons & Dragons" IN NAME ONLY. Because the change from 3.5 to 4E wasn't that much more extreme than the change from 2E to 3.0. I guess someone will always take offense to rule changes. Despite the relatively minor changes between OD&D, BD&D, AD&D, and 2E, Arneson didn't consider AD&D his game anymore, and the same thing happened with Gygax when 2E came out.
We call it Pathfinder, although if someone doesn't recognize that we tell them "Just think of it as D&D v3.75"
It amuses me that so many people consider 4E to be "Dungeons & Dragons" IN NAME ONLY. Because the change from 3.5 to 4E wasn't that much more extreme than the change from 2E to 3.0. I guess someone will always take offense to rule changes. Despite the relatively minor changes between OD&D, BD&D, AD&D, and 2E, Arneson didn't consider AD&D his game anymore, and the same thing happened with Gygax when 2E came out.
The fires of edition conflict must be stoked.
4rons are playing a pen & paper MMO/boardgame, and aren't really roleplaying. It's not D&D!
3tards bask in needless complexity, unable to embrace modern game design. It's not D&D!
It amuses me that so many people consider 4E to be "Dungeons & Dragons" IN NAME ONLY. Because the change from 3.5 to 4E wasn't that much more extreme than the change from 2E to 3.0. I guess someone will always take offense to rule changes. Despite the relatively minor changes between OD&D, BD&D, AD&D, and 2E, Arneson didn't consider AD&D his game anymore, and the same thing happened with Gygax when 2E came out.The fires of edition conflict must be stoked.
4rons are playing a pen & paper MMO/boardgame, and aren't really roleplaying. It's not D&D!
3tards bask in needless complexity, unable to embrace modern game design. It's not D&D!
Speaking as one who calculated THAC0 back in the day, it's still the same game, though I consider Pathfinder to be far closer to the game I want to play than 4e.
Then again, I always cherry-picked the rules and threw things out.
You know, I still don't understand what the deal with the Thac0 hate... I am bad, and I mean BAD at math... I still count on my bloody fingers... seriously. I just don't want to deal with math.
I can still do Thac0 in my head, for the most part. It's easy: Thac0 minus AC equals your Target number or higher roll (Thac0-AC= TN+ on a D20).
First level "anyone" (thac0: 20) trying to hit an unarmored person w/no dex bonus: (AC 10) 20-10= 10 and up hits.
a third level fighter (thac0: 18) trying to hit un-dex modified person in chainmail and a shield (AC: 4): 18-4= 14+ to hit roll.
Follow math, and a negative plus a negative equals a positive (IE Thac0: 8 VS an AC: -2 calculated is: 8+2= 10 or higher to hit).
I just don't get the issues people had with the concept.
Chief Technical Officer
|
...there is a game already with those initials, Palladium Fantasy Role Playing Game, and they even have a registered trade mark.1. Good point; and
2. Trademark? Sad.
Palladium likes to use unregistered trademarks (™) a lot, but they currently only have *registered* trademarks (®) for five things: Rifts, Megaverse, The Mechanoids, Palladium Books, and After the Bomb.
Nevertheless, we don't use "PFRPG" in print or in any official capacity; it's used merely as a parenthetical abbreviation in product listings on our website.
Yes and the Compatibility licence specifically prohibits a 3pp from using PFRPG to reference it in product "Pathfinder Roleplaying Game" is required by the licence :)
|
Winter wolf it isn't that i hated thaco, something better came along.
Having armor class spread from 10 to 0 to -10 made sense at one point of time.
Now having armor class start at 0 and progress to 20 makes more sense.
It is simpler more intuitive. the former thaco system i learned through practice.
Kuthulu let me first say, I happen to see things a little differently from you. I am not trying to stoke any fires. The main reason why i see 4.0 or perhaps i should say 4E, as a different game, and Pathfinder as a direct evolution of the first edition 1.0 to second eddtion 2.0, to 3.0 and 3.5 D&D, to Pathfinder is because i can see the conective tissue between the editions. One example would be the evolution of thaco to Base attack bonus, which Pathfinder has kept. You can also see direct evolution in the character classes. I havn't seen such similarites with 4.0. Perhaps i have missed something. for me the changes were so complete, that when i both played and DMed the game for several months when 4.0 first came out, i found i was playing an entirely new game. but that is merely my impression memories and experience. I am sure yours will probobly differ from mine.
I suppose the simpelest way to put things is this: i don't find 4.0 to be my cup of tea. Personally i find Pathfinder to be my cup of tea. I think at the end of the day, with roleplaying games, what is most important, is that you are getting together in person ( not over a computer network) with your friends to spend some time with them and to have some fun together. the game system you use doesn't really matter. What mattes is weather you are having fun with your friends.
As for the origional question. I tell people outside the gaming comunity that i am playing D&D. I tell people inside the Gaming Community that I am playing Pathfinder.
SImilarily, in the past when I have told people that Ipracticed Tae Kwon do, a Korean martial art, people have looked at me blankly, but if i mentioned i did Karate, which i believe is an Okanawan Martial art, people said oh cool, i have heard of that.
I think we saw something similar with the new "karate Kid". I wish they had called it the "kungfu Kid" or something like that. i think the move took place in Beijing, not Tokoyo.
I prefer to refer to the game as Pathfinder. I will continue to support this game.
To those who are fellow gamers ( not MMORPG players) i say i'm playing Pathfinder and to those outside the comunity, i mention that i am playing D&D. Perhaps i should simply say Pathfinder.
We play DnD, the pathfindeer veersion. Pathfinder is more DnD than 4e. In fact I ahve never reffered to $e as DnD. ( Sorry for the $e hate but i can't stand it, it's not DnD its a different game)
I know it's hard for alot of young players to understand. But as a long time dnd player 4e broke the hearts of many older players. Of course we still play alot of earlier editions too, they each had their own flavor and we loved them all, until 4e. I know it's silly to an extent.
It amuses me that so many people consider 4E to be "Dungeons & Dragons" IN NAME ONLY. Because the change from 3.5 to 4E wasn't that much more extreme than the change from 2E to 3.0. I guess someone will always take offense to rule changes. Despite the relatively minor changes between OD&D, BD&D, AD&D, and 2E, Arneson didn't consider AD&D his game anymore, and the same thing happened with Gygax when 2E came out.The fires of edition conflict must be stoked.
4rons are playing a pen & paper MMO/boardgame, and aren't really roleplaying. It's not D&D!
3tards bask in needless complexity, unable to embrace modern game design. It's not D&D!
Speaking as one who calculated THAC0 back in the day, it's still the same game, though I consider Pathfinder to be far closer to the game I want to play than 4e.
Then again, I always cherry-picked the rules and threw things out.
thAC0!!! you heretic, it's combat tables or it's not true dnd!!!
LOL!!! just teasing.|
|
ElyasRavenwood, don't get me wrong. I don't like 4E. But I don't dislike simply because it changed things, I dislike it because of the substance of those changes. Mainly because from my (admittedly) casual review of the rules, it seems that there's little real distinction between classes anymore. They achieved great balance between the classes, but they did so by making all the classes the same with some flavor differences.
From OD&D; BD&D, AD&D, and 2E changed the system in incrimental ways. Both 3E and 4E basically threw away the previous system and built a new one from the ground up, albeit with some influenced from the previous editions.
Like others have said, it depends.
"Hey hon, Friday I'm going over to Dan's to play D&D."
"Hey guys, we should convert to Pathfinder."
Basically, D&D describes the game I'm playing. Pathfinder describes the particular rule set I use. IMHO D&D encompasses everything from the original box to 4e and PFRPG. That doesn't mean I like or even play all of that, but it's all still D&D.
Another angle... generalizing and saying I'm playing D&D sort of legitimizes Paizo's efforts. One, it says that Pathfinder is part of a multi-decade-long chain of product, not some improvised newcomer. Two, it says the PFRPG isn't claiming to be all-new; it's still massively based on WotC's D&D intellectual property so credit where credit is due.
I understand Paizo can't say it's D&D, but I sure can.
Yeah, that's exactly how I feel and call it. The game is D&D, Pathfinder is the version we play.
We call it Pathfinder or D&D pretty interchangable here.
Unless of course I get a chance to go, "THIS! IS! PATHFINDER!" *chestkick*
this is madness...
I use D&D to describe the game to folks who have played D&D but are not really aware of Pathfinder. I'm trying to use Pathfinder more often to describe the game when I can, because I'd like to get to a point eventually where Pathfinder is seen as its own awesome entity, rather than an alternate version of D&D.
|
In our house, we use DnD and Pathfinder pretty much interchangeably. We also tend to refer to our gaming by the name of the adventure path or module we are using.
Thinking about it, I always refer to the current edition as "Fourth edition." I have never once called it Dungeons and Dragons, likely because I have never played it, not because of an inherent bias against it.
When speaking with non-gamers, I always refer to it as role-playing, as in, "We like games: card games, board games, role-playing games." I have noticed, as a tangent, that more and more people associate gaming with video games and thus you can't just say, I'm a gamer - you have to specify what kind of games you mean. When people ask us where we are vacationing and we tell them we are going to a gaming convention, 9 times out of 10, their first question/statement is akin to, "You going to play a lot of video games?"
|
|
I was just curious. When you play Pathfinder do you actually call it Pathfinder or do you call it D&D?
So when gathering your friends for a game; do you say "can you make it on Sunday to play Pathfinder?" or do you say "can you make it on Sunday to play D&D?"
I'll start first. My group still calls it D&D.
Our group mostly refers to it as 'D&D' or 'gaming' but we are starting to refer to it as Pathfinder, interchangebly with D&D.
I think once Pathfinder has more material being used in our game than 3.5, we might start refering to it solely as Pathfinder.
Pathfinder, to us, is the spirtual successor and actual heir to 3.5/original D&D.
4.0 may be an excellent product but it is not what any of us wanted from our RPG time.
+1
I tell my friends I play D&D, but if any of them know anything about the game or show interest, I specify pathfinder.
It's like milk; I drink milk, but if you're really into your milk, I drink Paul's milk.
We call it Pathfinder or to a lesser extent just "gaming", dont recall the last time we called anything D&D.
|
|
Our group gamed on Monday and when one of the players referred to the game as D&D another player,who up until 6 months ago played 4e exclusively (I still play 4e with another group once a month so nothing against 4e), said will you please never refer to this as dnd again? It's Pathfinder and their authors put in a great effort to make the game as balanced as possible." We all had a good laugh and decided to call it PF from now on.
I think it's hilarious that it happened on Monday and now I see a thread about what people call it!
We call our actual Pathfinder game Pathfinder or Kingmaker. We call my campaign by its name. We call both campaigns "D&D".
Like others, we call it what we've been saying for years "Rolemaster". It doesnt matter that we havent actually played rolemaster for ten years or so. I dont quite understand the animosity about game systems - I dont really see any meaningful difference between PF and 4E as rules systems.
The gulf in quality between available adventures for each system is far more relevant, imo.
I guess my groups are pretty weird, then. We refer to everything as "(Name's) (Campaign/Nickname)" - so "Jim's Loris game" or "Matt's Darkworld game" or "Pete's Stormtrooper A-Team" game. Once the game is started, the system is academic to the game itself.
Darkworld and Loris, mentioned above, just happen to be using Pathfinder.
Stormtrooper A-Team uses Star Wars Saga.
If someone were to ask us what we were playing, we'd say "We're playing a campaign titled "Darkworld," where all of our characters are searching the Spacelanes of Wildspace to find the key to saving our sun from a magical wasting plague placed on it by the minions of Orcus" because to us that's more important than the ruleset. If they got specific, I'd probably add " We're using the Pathfinder RPG from Paizo Publishing. It's based on the 3.5 OGL rules. You might know them from D&D 3rd Edition. They're similar, but not identical."