But maybe a more important gauge is to ask if it is becoming easier find Pthfinder players to have some fun with?
Compared to a year and a half ago, say? Hell yes.
I think there are a lot of people who enjoyed 3.5, but got tired of its cheesiness. Then 4th Edition came out, and many of the 3.5 players either quit playing entirely or started playing 4E.
But in classic WotC fashion, 4E has now become inundated with an excessive number of splat books. The system can only support so much, before they run out of options and X move is just a clone of Y move from a different class.
With the streamlining and fixes of Pathfinder over 3.5 (whatever you may think of current Pathfinder balance, few can argue about it being less cheesy than 3.5), it drew a lot of people back into the gaming fold, whether it's 3.5 players who retired or those who got bored of 4E.
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.
Dunno, but my buddies nephew was reading a 4e book (while camping in the woods.) He's 12 or 13, looks to be a bookish kid. I mentioned Pathfinder and he said he knew what that was.
Based on that experience, I'd say there are young gamers out there who, with the right example, would play Pathfinder.
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.
|
My only recent gaming experiences with Pathfinder and DnD 4E has been online Via VTT'S and ll I can say is there are more players than you can shake a stick at. I currently run 2 games and am playing in 3 games all Pathfinder and if i wanted to I could literally run 2 or 3 games a day with the amount of people i have had contact me with interest in playing.
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 played 4E from the very first release day, for quite a while. The powers system in itself is very combat-oriented. Everything is along the lines of 'X[W] damage and enemies suffers Y debuff'. You're pigeonholed into playing a single class (the multiclass system is clumsy at best), and if the particular abilities you'd like your character to have or want to attempt isn't on your list of powers, you're hosed. And even if it is on your list, you'll likely only be able to do it once in an encounter.
4E to me seems to go back to being primarily a miniatures game, with the majority of the system based around what you can do in your grid-based fights. They even have power cards, like several other miniatures games have. I do like a few of the things that 4E implemented, like at-will powers and the 'marking' system to make something akin to a 'tank' viable, as well as some more flavorful attacks. The saving throws as a defense is another one I'm a fan of. But those are, again, entirely combat oriented. If your group is the kind that enjoys that kind of heavy ROLLplaying, then it's a great system for what it does.
But such a system just doesn't have the room for character customization that the more flexible Pathfinder system offers. And that is why I believe that many players are forsaking 4E and going to Pathfinder. My local area used to have several long-running 4E games, but now every single one of them has started playing Pathfinder instead. There's a good 6-7 games just locally.
That's where a lot of the comparisons to an MMO come from. You've got X number of powers to choose from, and thus limited ways to approach a given situation. There's a threat system, characters are focused on a particular role (Defender, Leader, Controller, Striker), and all their abilities are aimed specifically at that role. Sure, it makes things like a 'balanced' party easy to come up with. One defender, one leader, two strikers, and a controller (sounds like WoW to me). But it removes a lot of the thinking from combat and character creation. It's great for the young, beginning, and gamer market because it's easy to grasp, but leaves much to be desired for other gamers. It's essentially the Wii of RPG systems.
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
let's not get too off topic here. :) Anyway, are you finding it easier to find Pthfinder playerz?
Much easier than it was six months or a year ago. In my store, more Pathfinder games are looking for players than D&D games, and I have more people using my table space for Pathfinder than I have using it for D&D.
I would still call the sales split in my store, though. More people who are BRAND NEW to role playing are picking up D&D, especially due to the Encounters program. But more people who are looking for an old-school campaign are choosing Pathfinder.
As well, I routinely have people posting flyers announcing the beginning of a Pathfinder home game. I do not have people often starting D&D home games.
Last, I have 12 tables full of players per month for Pathfinder Society, often with waiting lists. Living Forgotten Realms only gets 10 tables of players each month, usually with each table being light a player or two.
I'd say the player base for Pathfinder is larger, based on all this. At least, in my store it is.
|
Were I live i find Pathfinder non existent. both the game store near me sell the books, they sell fast I am told by the shop keep, but neither store runs a game.
I have purchased the core book, advanced plays guide, ultimate magic,game mastery guide, inner sea world guide, bestiary 1 and 2, and also some module, i planed on starting my own game. No takers. I can not get it off the ground.
Were I live i find Pathfinder non existent. both the game store near me sell the books, they sell fast I am told by the shop keep, but neither store runs a game.
I have purchased the core book, advanced plays guide, ultimate magic,game mastery guide, inner sea world guide, bestiary 1 and 2, and also some module, i planed on starting my own game. No takers. I can not get it off the ground.
Hi Triga, One of my friends decided to start a separate group at a different time from the Pathfinder group that I DM. I am a player in his game. He joined some Roleplayer online hookup service and our group filled up within two months. Now, granted, we went through a few people before we found the right mix. But gosh, I was amazed how quickly we found a core group with the same playing styles.
Perhaps, it is easier in my town because it has so many Navy personnel. Though, only one of the players is actually serving, and we do worry about her getting transferred :(
Greg
It's easier for me to find 4e players than Pathfinder players. Which is a shame. But I play 4e. In fact I play 4e more frequently than I Play Pathfinder or 3.5. About twice as often as I play 3.5 and PF together.
I prefer Pathfinder, but I never got tired of 3.5 either.
I'm not a 4e hater. I enjoy the game. It's just not D&D, not in any way that I can compare it to previous versions of the game. It's not an MMO either, as much as people want to sneer at it as "WoW on a tabletop." I have played WoW for years and have raided at the highest level of the game.
I'm sort of an equal opportunity gamer. I play chess too. And Axis and Allies. And I've been known to get the Monopoly board out on occasion.
The thing about 4e is that it's so totally focused on combat balance that they've put the focus of the game squarely on combat. Sure you CAN role play 4e, heck you can role play Monopoly (and I do). But most 4e players I game with or observe don't role play. Not like they do in PF or 3.5. The games are a string of encounters with the time between encounters virtually entirely devoted to sharing loot and buying new and fancier magic items.
I do try to inject role playing into my 4e games. My group is one of the more role play centric groups that I've seen play 4e. But I've yet to see a 4e player come to the table with a drunken, drug addicted gambler on his last legs who is desperate to get back with his wife. I'm sure it happens here and there, but I just don't see it. I see that sort of thing all the time in PF and 3.5.
Just my observations.
That's where a lot of the comparisons to an MMO come from. You've got X number of powers to choose from, and thus limited ways to approach a given situation. There's a threat system, characters are focused on a particular role (Defender, Leader, Controller, Striker), and all their abilities are aimed specifically at that role. Sure, it makes things like a 'balanced' party easy to come up with. One defender, one leader, two strikers, and a controller (sounds like WoW to me). But it removes a lot of the thinking from combat and character creation. It's great for the young, beginning, and gamer market because it's easy to grasp, but leaves much to be desired for other gamers. It's essentially the Wii of RPG systems.
This is literally the opposite of everything I've experienced in 4e.
The powers give far more versatility to every class that is not "wizard," there's no "threat system," the roles are very open ended even when you don't include things like hybrids, and you can easily make a party that doesn't have the "one defender, one leader, one controller, two strikers," and if that "sounds like WoW" I'd hate to think what the old "Fighter, wizard, cleric, thief" means.
I'll grant you that it's great for young and beginner players, though! Of course, it's also great for experienced and older players, too ;)
|
For me in the UK, at conventions Pathfinder is very popular, though it is pretty much exclsuively PFS (which is okay as that is what I play). It is more popular than say LFR it seems.
In my local Meetup group though, not many seem to play PF (though I found another one last night and even though at the first mention of 4e he called it a heresy and WoW we got along :)
In my Meetup group I just finished running a 4e game, have just started playing in a 4e game and there are at least two other 4e campaigns going on as well. There is also a 3.5 campaign in Ravenloft going on. But no PF.
That is not to say PF players aren't out there, my old weekly group play PF, and I have played a couple of PFS scenarios with a couple from that group and two other players.
But generally in my locality it seems to be 3.5 or 4e in terms of D&D (with a bit of 2e on offer as well).
As for 4e and roleplaying - I think it all comes down to the GM, players and possibly the scenario being run (if it is published). The 4e campaign I ran - I structured it and ran it just as I would any other rpg campaign I would run. We averaged maybe one fight a session, with some sessions having a couple and a couple of sessions having no combat.
We had a Warforged who was different and seeking out his creator, a young House Orien member who was seeking status, got married and had a child, and we had a Changeling spy who had to confront someone who had resurrected a past identity he had used.
4e seems to offer the same tools for non-combat roleplaying as PF does with perhaps the exception of crafting skills, which is because 4e purposely doesn't focus on that aspect of adventuring, and when it does it isn't in a manner to do things cheaper than simply buying them.
|
|
In one year, I've ran Pathfinder for some 50 new players in my area. Several of those began running PF groups of their own. Everybody who had any experience with 3.5 jumped right in and felt comfortable with the rules, folks with no prior D&D experience are doing good as well. A few have complained that the rules are too complicated, but that's more a general critique of D&D vs. narrative systems.
4e is virtually non-existent in Poland (mostly thanks to the publisher releasing PHB and DMG but never getting MM out), and I have already held seminars on Pathfinder at two conventions, with two more coming up this summer. The blogosphere and RPG portals are picking up Pathfinder as well, and the biggest RPG portal in Poland is having a weekly "News from the Path" column where they cover Pathfinder and related news.
And I have THREE full new groups lining up to run We Be Goblins for them. Now, if only somebody would translate Pathfinder to Polish...
Now, if only somebody would translate Pathfinder to Polish...
According to Google, it's "Wyszukiwarka ścieżki".
You're welcome. ;-)
|
|
Well, in Peterborough UK I have had a hard time finding an RP group, I have found one now but am stuck playing 3.5 though a number of them have experienced a bit of Pathfinder. Then again, the club does a variety of games and apparently just finished a 6 month Pathfinder campaign.
Interestingly, it seems if people are not playing Pathfinder they are playing 3.5, I know very vrey few people playing 4e.
|
|
I haven’t found it very difficult to find pathfinder players. I’m in South Eastern Vermont. The games store I go to is in Keene NH.
At our local gaming store, there are usually 3 to 4 games there. One game has 9 players is a “rogue Trader” game. There is also a fairly large 3.5 game who meets there on occasion. The other two games are Pathfinder. Some of the people who work in the store tell me that the pathfinder products fly off of the shelves, while the D&D products linger on the shelf.
I also think allot has to do with the people who run the local gaming community. If those people like 4E they will bring their groups in. If those people like Pathfinder, they will bring their groups in that direction.
So to answer your question, yes I think it is easier.
In my own group, almost all my friends are gamers so I've got a pretty wide pool of players to find, many of whom play, like, or would be interested in playing Pathfinder... so I didn't have to "find them."
All I can say in the general area I live in... understanding this is all anecdotal:
-- The four local game stores all stock at least some Pathfinder, and I see it move on the shelves (a book shows up, disappears, gets restocked, etc.)
-- Major booksellers like Barnes and Noble also at least keep the core rulebook and the APG stocked.
-- When I run the occasional demo at my favorite FLGS, I have no trouble finding players, and I run into people at the store often who have played or are interested in Pathfinder (most recently, the guy who ran the D&D4E demo at Free RPG Day was talking about his excitement in playing an all-goblin Pathfinder campaign with the new Goblins of Golarion book coming out).
This suggests it is at least a somewhat popular RPG to play in the area (northern Maryland/Baltimore metro area).
None of my friends would touch 4e (no edition war, please. just personal preference), and since I'm GM most of the time, we pretty much went right into PF after it came out (or during the beta, in fact). So, in essence I've NEVER found it hard to find PF players. They're the same players I have for everything.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems to be getting easier here in Los Angeles, yes.
|
|
But in classic WotC fashion, 4E has now become inundated with an excessive number of splat books. The system can only support so much, before they run out of options and X move is just a clone of Y move from a different class.
What this really necseesary. Some posters have been saying about Pathfinder since the APG was released. Lets try to not turn this into another bash $e thread for no good reason. As to the OP somewhat easier yet in my neck of the woods 4E is still stronger.
|
|
A couple of weeks ago I only new of one person that played Pathfinder, and he had just recently moved out of state... so i would say that, then, it was extremely difficult to find Pathfinder players.
Then, I said "You know, this Adventure Path looks awesome - I'm going to run Pathfinder," and suddenly I have a full play group in a regular game of Pathfinder, and another full play group that is excited to get a chance to try it out.
...I suppose that is a sort of "cheating" when it comes to finding players though, since they are all the guys I play other RPGs with.
To address the OP's overall question, I think that thenobledrake's story illustrates what it will take to actually fuel the growth of PFRPG: it won't necessarily be the appeal of the ruleset to potential players, but its appeal to GMs who will then recruit players.
There's a marketing term for this: brand advocates? (Not sure) So I would think it's more telling of the future health of PFRPG if there are more people who are so excited by the system that they are ready to use it to bring together their friends and tell their stories, etc.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
I wish it were otherwise but no it seems any excuse to start one. That is why I word my threads very very carefully. So that I can avoid it.Is it *really* that difficult to answer the OP without dragging the edition war into it?!?!?
Let it go already...
Hm. I guess I didn't originally see my response as edition warring, but I can now see how it is. I meant it more as a comparison of PFRPG players versus an established brand that absolutely has players who will always play that game. I'll be more careful with my own wording in the future. After all, both games are important to the health of my store, and I always try to make that clear to those shopping with me.
At any rate, I think ronaldsf's statement about GMs getting excited and actively recruiting is 100% accurate and the largest reason for the shifting numbers that I see. PFRPG has active cheerleaders in the GMs, which creates an avid player base. D&D 4e has a bunch of people who want to play, but have a hard time finding someone who wants to run a game. Often, they learn the ropes at Encounters tables, then wind up playing for a PFRPG campaign.
On a side note, it is *really* hard to get players to stop calling it D&D. I started running PF for my daughter and some younger friends, and they had no preconceptions. Then, one day, someone's dad said "Oh, you're playing D&D." Now they all call it that.
|
|
On a side note, it is *really* hard to get players to stop calling it D&D. I started running PF for my daughter and some younger friends, and they had no preconceptions. Then, one day, someone's dad said "Oh, you're playing D&D." Now they all call it that.
Kleenex, Thermos, Xerox, Saran Wrap, Muzak, etc. C'est la vie.
Cool avatar, by the way.
|
|
On a side note, it is *really* hard to get players to stop calling it D&D. I started running PF for my daughter and some younger friends, and they had no preconceptions. Then, one day, someone's dad said "Oh, you're playing D&D." Now they all call it that.
Yeah, and that's not necessarily a bad thing, in your daughter's case at least. "D&D" is kind of a default term for the hobby. It's not so important to call it Pathfinder as the fact that she's actually playing Pathfinder - it's almost a good thing and a relief that your daughter and her friends don't really care. And perhaps also it's just that D&D is easier and quicker to say :P
Whether "Pathfinder" becomes the new default term will play itself out on its own, quite independently from the nomenclature we insist upon within the hobby - it'll depend on the growing popularity of the game system. On that front, things are looking pretty good.
|
|
While I understand the legal ramifications of pathfinder being specifically called out as not being Dungeons & Dragons, it does nothing to change the fact that Pathfinder IS D&D.
In my town we have (As I count) 8 independent D&D & Pathfinder games running weekly. Five of these are playing Pathfinder, 1 is playing AD&D, 1 is playing 4th ed, and the last is still playing a 3.5 Age of Worms game. Everybody calls their game D&D. Maybe it is because it is easier to say, or the fact that the game has become something of a well known cultural thing that simply stating D&D evokes what you need to know about it all. I would have to explain what Pathfinder is to most people when they ask what my tuesday or friday plans are, so instead I tell them I have a D&D game, the message gets across and if they are interested then the conversation can go further from there but otherwise it makes things much easier.
|
|
Answer to the OP short version - Yes. It is easier.
Had you asked even six months ago, the answer was the opposite. At least with my interactions here in the Twin Cities.
Hello fellow Minnesotan. Not my experience at all. I have found it quite easy to find Pathfinder games for APs since launch. Society play was a bit slow 6 months ago but it has exploded recently. Every other week the game at Fantasy Flight fills 3 and now 4 tables. There is a game every Sunday at the source I have not been there though so cant comment on the popularity of that game. So my experience is Pathfinder has been out there and not any more of a challenge to fill a table than any other game.
Well, D&D does have a thirty year lead when it comes to what an FRPG should be called. Kind of like "Band-Aid", "Kleenex", and "Asprin". All of these are (or in Asprin's case, were) brand names. However, everybody uses them as generic descriptions now-a-days.
True. Edition wars aside, I guess I just kind of felt betrayed by 4e. I'm, therefore, a big Pathfinder cheerleader, and like to throw the name around when I can. I really mean no disrespect to 4e players, it's just not my bag. at all.
|
Hm. I guess I didn't originally see my response as edition warring, but I can now see how it is. I meant it more as a comparison of PFRPG players versus an established brand that absolutely has players who will always play that game. I'll be more careful with my own wording in the future. After all, both games are important to the health of my store, and I always try to make that clear to those shopping with me.
It was not directed at you good sir. In fact, I don't think anyone intends to pick a fight anymore. I think everyone is expecting a flame war to begin at any time, so as soon as both editions are mentioned in the same paragraph, the dogs are loosed to battle.
This thread just happens to be a perfect example. The OP makes no mention of 4e. It was a question solely about PFRPG. However, it couldn't get two posts before someone NEEDED to hold it up in the holy comparison of 4e popularity.
I don't think the poster meant anything by it. And it was hardly written as a harsh criticism of 4e. However, look how quickly it devolved after that. Like blood in the water.
Then I come along, innocently passing through, and I see a topic. I read the first post. No mention of 4e! Yay, I can read safely, without having my gaming preference impugned. Then the flame shark streaks up from below and drags me down. Tricked, I was tricked I tells ya!
I guess my point is thus: if it isn't absolutely necessary to compare the two... then don't. If it IS absolutely necessary to compare... well then I wouldn't be reading the thread anyway unless I had a sincere schadenfreude deficit.
I hereby declare that PFRPG and 4e shall stay at least two thread away from each other all times....
Ok... I can dream, anyway...
...way too much coffee...