NO! I call it Pathfinder only. That's because when I'm done telling someone how much I love not only the game, but the company that makes it, I want them to ask their FLGS for Pathfinder, not D&D!
I loved D&D, and will always be grateful to WOTC and Ryan Dancey for rescuing it from TSR's poor management -and- for giving us the wonderfully generous OGL. But that was before Hasbro ripped the spirit out of WOTC and tried to kill the OGL with their poison pill.
I -like- 4e. I have played it once a year at GenCon and always had fun. It's just not D&D. It is some unrelated game with the D&D label slapped on the side (like slapping a Pilsner Urquel label on a bottle of Budweiser) (I can do beer references, too!) WOTC/Hasbro has the right to do that, but it doesn't make it D&D.
So...try to refer to -our- game as Pathfinder. Keep the momentum going!
no one would get this song if you tried to put pathfinder in there. Besides, what rhymes with pathfinder?
Horse blinders?
Corn grinder?
Soviet minder?
...
Wait, you mean it ISN'T DnD? Let's see...
Wizards, Clerics, Fighters... Paladins... Ogres... Dragons... obscure rules... Nerd Rage... overpowering builds, monks suck...
Yeah, it's DnD. Fie on anyone who says otherwise.
Yes, because PF is heir to the house that Gary and Dave built, not 4th edition.
Lejendary Adventure is the true heir.
We call it rolemaster (though we've always had a DM, even when we did actually play rolemaster). The older I get, the more set in my ways I seem to become.
We call it rolemaster (though we've always had a DM, even when we did actually play rolemaster). The older I get, the more set in my ways I seem to become.
There's a chart for that.
We still call it D&D AND There is a Dungeon Master not a GM! Thats just the way it is.
We call it rolemaster (though we've always had a DM, even when we did actually play rolemaster). The older I get, the more set in my ways I seem to become.There's a chart for that.
Aahh...memories. :)
No matter what I play, I call it by its name, not what I think it is.
How can you not call it what you think it is?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For folks who dont know much about gaming its just "game night." Otherwise its Pathfinder or Call of Cthulhu or Dr. Who or etc..etc.. Depending on what I am playing at the time. So for people who are gamers or are interested in my hobby enough to ask, I tell them by name what game I happen to be playing at the time. Personally, I am not married to D&D so I fell free to see other games and am very open about it.
D&D.
When we were playing Basic we called it 'D&D'.
When we were playing Advanced Dungoens & Dragons we called it 'D&D'.
When we were playing 2nd ed we called it 'D&D'.
Now we are playing Pathfinder/3.X we call it D&D
If you are playing 4th ed I'd call it 'D&D'.
D&D is the generic catch all - like 'Poker night'
If I was having a technical discussion about what exactly was being played then I'd identify the variety of rules we were using, but at the end of the day the one all encompasing term that encapsulates it all is...
D&D.
By not thinking about it. :)No matter what I play, I call it by its name, not what I think it is.How can you not call it what you think it is?
An attractive solution to many problems, imo.
D&D is the generic catch all - like 'Poker night'
This. This is how it's always been with my group, whether it was homebrew, 3.5 or Pathfinder.
|
For about two years I continued to refer to Pathfinder as D&D. Over the past year I have slowly begun to substitute Pathfinder. It may be because I have people in my game group that also play D&D 4e. Interestingly many people I know that play 4e refer to it as "4e" not D&D. At least in my neck of the woods it seems we are in an age of editions that is different than in the past. Perhaps because this is the first time that a large segment of the gamer population chose not to simply move on to the new edition but stuck with the old...and fortunately Paizo was around to support that movement.
To me: Old versions of D&D are D&D (or AD&D for a spell when both were active).
Pathfinder is truer to them, so is also D&D. (Mona even called himself Gygaxian, much to my delight.)
Gygax could play Pathfinder with a pregen PC for any core class. He'd know the spells (mostly) and the monsters (mostly), as he made them himself. Some of the changes may throw him off, but the bulk is still there.
Gygax would have to study 4th ed. to play it. He'd not recognize one ability (except by the stolen name) and couldn't tell you much about its monsters. It's not DnD. I call it 4th ed. (or occasionally D&Diablo, when antagonistic).
If somebody asks if I play DnD, I say, "Yes, Pathfinder."
If somebody asks if I like Dnd, I say, (long version) "I've played it for decades. I don't like the changes in the new edition, so I play Pathfinder."
(Saying 'switched to' sounds wrong because 1d6/level fireballs and all that accumulated knowledge carried over into Pathfinder, not into 4th ed.)
Oh, and sometimes I ask D&D players if they play "old school or 4.0"
End low-key rant.
Thank you, OP, for bringing back memories. Time to reexamine some of my Greyhawk goodies.
JMK
I still call it D&D.
I still heavily consult older D&D stuff, even though the core rule system is rooted in PF's updated 3.5.
I wouldn't refer to 4th edition as D&D, I have much worse names for it.
I think of d&d as 'roleplaying' with rules. Roleplaying is a term I never use on it's own as it brings up painful memories of terrible LARPS and I-games in which insane incestuous game masters turned university into a inbred nightmare cliche ridden clique.
So I'd say "I play d&d" far far sooner than I'd call myself a "roleplayer"
Also has been mentioned, outsiders have 'some' idea what d&d is. Pathfinder sounds like a branch of boy scouts, or maybe army rangers.
D&D.
D&D is the generic catch all - like 'Poker night'
Having played since the old 1st Ed. AD&D days (back when the dinosaurs were still in their death-throws) Myself and my group have always called what we were playing DnD.
Even when it was Cyberpunk.
Non-players knew it was some sort of game that involved sitting around a table and eating lots of chips.
We still call it DnD now (except when talking with spouses/significant others, to whom it has become 'Nerd Questing', but I suspect that's an entirely different thread.)
Reggie
And so another thread becomes a 4E bash-fest. I suppose in this case it was inevitable...
And so another thread becomes a 4E bash-fest. I suppose in this case it was inevitable...
There were problems with 3.5, there is no doubt about that, but WoTC showed that they did not know how to fix it and that they had a different focus. The rate they released the books made D&D feel like Oprah's book of the month club, and the quality of the book was getting worse and worse the closer to 4e you got. 4e has some real good things about it, like movement changes and rechargeable actions on a die roll, but in the end it is just a bad game that has little to no weight.
Though there was a great point made, Paizo deserves the brand recognition and so I will try to call it Pathfinder from here on.
It varies. I think we're in the middle of a transition, so we'll see both.
When we get to Pathfinder 2.0, I imagine the lines will be more clearly drawn.
And so another thread becomes a 4E bash-fest. I suppose in this case it was inevitable...
And kind of on topic, since the very existence of the question implies the further query as to what to call 4th edition.
It depends on the context. I use "DnD" as a generic term simply because I've played enough different versions, and PF is derived from that same history, that unless I'm talking about specific games/groups/campaigns/rules, it's easier to stick with the more generic term. Now as PF matures, and becomes its own game, the generic term is often less effective, so I'm more likely to specify PF.
And kind of on topic, since the very existence of the question implies the further query as to what to call 4th edition.
And I find such an inference a poorly-veiled justification for edition-warring; edition-warring which renders Paizo.com just a little more insular each time.
Inevitable "what are you even doing here?" post (usually from someone whom I predate here by several years) in 3, 2, 1...
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sigh... here we go again.
I don't play 4th edition. This is my choice. However I don't disparage anyone who plays that system. No-one here has the right to tell anyone what system they should play or how they should have fun. If it works for you then awesome, knock yourself out.
It all comes down to this. 4th ed is a good thing, even if you hate it. Just like World of Darkness, Shadowrun, Mutants and Masterminds, Dark Heresy and Warhammer are all good things. Put simply the more games that are out there the more the gaming sector grows and that can only be a good thing.
If a 4th Ed. player comes onto the Paizo site and buys a flip mat then they are directly contributing to the success of Pathfinder. Conversely, when I buy a D&D minatures pack I am directly supporting WotC. Both businesses grow and by extension reach out to new players and new GM's.
Without the huge amount of support that WotC gives the gaming community, roleplaying in general would suffer. WotC's sponsorship of events like Gen Con promotes and develops gaming in general. I for one support that fully.
Whining that you don't like 4th ed is old; very, very old. Just remember that without D&D roleplaying in general would suffer. You may not like the game in it's current incarnation but whining about it just makes the board look elitist, petty, negative and childish. Not a good advert for Pathfinder players frankly. Pack it in. Seriously.
We want more games to play not less. More games equals more players equals more cool stuff for us to buy. Long live 4th Ed I say, because it brings more people and more money into gaming and that helps everybody, Paizo included.
To answer the OP I usually call it Pathfinder but occasionally I'll slip back into calling it D&D. Old grognard habits die hard.
In terms of this discussion, 4E is just as hard to peg to "DnD" as Pathfinder is. Both have their roots in previous editions, and both at their core are still largely within that tradition, despite significant differences, but as each has developed, each has developed systems and concepts, both within and around the actual system, that simply don't exist in earlier "DnD" systems. PF is closer to the older model, but with UM and UC, took a firm step away from it, and I suspect as all of the currently optional rules released in those books and the APG are played with and refined, they will slowly push PF away from the earlier model a significant distance. 4E has already reached the point where the base system may still be partially recognizable when compared to earlier editions, but the game as a whole, and how it is approached, has become something completely different, with the advent of DDI, and the ability to constantly make small refinements rather than relying on infrequent releases of errata, book reprints, or the creation of new editions to absorb all the changes/adjustments/house rules that have built up over time. The active official use of accesories beyond miniatures and maps being pushed by both WotC and Paizo also changes the overall game and how it is played.
In this context, "DnD" as a generic term that could potentially cover multiple brands and companies still means something, but as a brand name in and of itself has become diluted in the details since even in the official family tree, you still have to denote edition when discussing specifics.
|
|
And kind of on topic, since the very existence of the question implies the further query as to what to call 4th edition.And I find such an inference a poorly-veiled justification for edition-warring; edition-warring which renders Paizo.com just a little more insular each time.
Inevitable "what are you even doing here?" post (usually from someone whom I predate here by several years) in 3, 2, 1...
What are you even doing here, you non-subscribing rabble-rouser? ;-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Among my circle, we refer to games by the DM.
"So on Thursday, are we going to play So-and-so's game?"
"No, What's-his-face is running his campaign."
"Okay, well I hope You-know-who gets his DMing mojo back soon. I really miss the You-know-who Campaign."
We mainly do this because each of our DMs has his own preferences and houserules, and if you were to add them all up, they probably account for even more of a difference than between 3.5 and Pathfinder.
We've had a few rare creative DMs who named their own campaign, so it's not even "we're going to play D&D this weekend" but rather "We're going to play Five Kingdoms."
What are you even doing here, you non-subscribing rabble-rouser? ;-)
Excellent. :)
I say it is based off of the 3.5 edition of dnd.
|
|
AD&D (aka 2.0) lives on still, known as HackMaster now. Originally a joke game parodying the worst aspects of D&D & others such as RoleMaster, but it actually uses the AD&D rulesset and as near as I know, still publishes product.
Pathfinder isn't all that dissimilar to Hackmaster in that it's a zombified (but many would say improved) version of dead D&D engines :)
I call it Pathfinder because that's what it is and Paizo deserves recognition for the hard work they put into it. If I'm talking to non-gamers I only refer to playing Pathfinder or any other game as "gaming" and they usually just assume board games or poker.
Some people will always refer to tabletop RPGs as D&D just like some people will always refer to any brand of soda as Coke. There's nothing wrong with that, I just prefer to be specific.
About seven or eight rotating members of my gaming group all call it D&D. Partly because it's not a complete departure from both system and style (like 4th ed) and partly because we're old.
|
Yeah, I call it Pathfinder, because that's its name. No matter what I play, I call it by its name, not what I think it is.
'Pathfinder' is a nickname, not 'its name', is it not? Its proper name is 'Pathfinder Roleplaying Game (tm)'.
:P
I call it D&D unless someone wants to know 'what kind'. Same as I call my tablet a tablet instead of my Andriod Asus Transformer blah blah blah. Most folks simply don't care about that level of detail, and I'd probably tell them D&D even if I was playing RIFTS.
Sigh... here we go again.
I don't play 4th edition. This is my choice. However I don't disparage anyone who plays that system. No-one here has the right to tell anyone what system they should play or how they should have fun. If it works for you then awesome, knock yourself out.
It all comes down to this. 4th ed is a good thing, even if you hate it. Just like World of Darkness, Shadowrun, Mutants and Masterminds, Dark Heresy and Warhammer are all good things. Put simply the more games that are out there the more the gaming sector grows and that can only be a good thing.
If a 4th Ed. player comes onto the Paizo site and buys a flip mat then they are directly contributing to the success of Pathfinder. Conversely, when I buy a D&D minatures pack I am directly supporting WotC. Both businesses grow and by extension reach out to new players and new GM's.
Without the huge amount of support that WotC gives the gaming community, roleplaying in general would suffer. WotC's sponsorship of events like Gen Con promotes and develops gaming in general. I for one support that fully.
Whining that you don't like 4th ed is old; very, very old. Just remember that without D&D roleplaying in general would suffer. You may not like the game in it's current incarnation but whining about it just makes the board look elitist, petty, negative and childish. Not a good advert for Pathfinder players frankly. Pack it in. Seriously.
We want more games to play not less. More games equals more players equals more cool stuff for us to buy. Long live 4th Ed I say, because it brings more people and more money into gaming and that helps everybody, Paizo included.
To answer the OP I usually call it Pathfinder but occasionally I'll slip back into calling it D&D. Old grognard habits die hard.
I think the above bears repeating.
I buy lots of WotC products. They, both through MtG & D&D 4th et al, support the fantasy gaming world like no other company, even our beloved Paizo.While part of me resents WotC changing D&D, Dragon mag, Dungeon mag, and dropping 3.x product lines, they are still nerdfolk like us, just supporting a different D&D. They are our friends, not enemies, and many Paizo & WotC employees are good friends who play D&D (whichever) together.
People drawn into any DnD are likely to play many RPGs. Having more selection (in style, not name) brings different sorts of players, players who keep the whole industry vital.
So, yeah, I may call 4th ed. by 4th ed. to differentiate it from my memories, but it's all D&D, like all big trash cans in alleyways are Dumpsters and all tissues are Kleenex. Coke vs. Pepsi wars are funny because most people drink soda and nobody's hurt by it. It's less funny when a minority (us gamers) starts to split itself even further.
This doesn't keep me from searching for converts, of course. :)
Anyway, I'm rambling, maybe just to myself, who is happy whenever I run into an RPGer of any sort. Adios.
JMK
|
|
Whining that you don't like 4th ed is old; very, very old. Just remember that without D&D roleplaying in general would suffer. You may not like the game in it's current incarnation but whining about it just makes the board look elitist, petty, negative and childish. Not a good advert for Pathfinder players frankly. Pack it in. Seriously.
+1
Less elitist, petty, negative and childish behavior would be very much endorsed on my part as well.
Sometimes I'll just say, "Let's play Drinking and Dragons." Though, I suppose I could just say, "Drinkfinder."