I started in the last days of 2E (1997 or so) before WotC bought TSR. My group at the time was in on the playtesting of 3.0 in summer '99. Played 3.0 and 3.5 for all the intervening time and transitioned to PF during beta.
I've also played Palladium, White Wolf WoD and Exalted, Dead Lands, Earthdawn, Shadowrun, D6 Star Wars, and 4E. However about 90% of my actual clocked hours role playing has been 3.0/3.5/PF.
Of course I played 3.5e... all the way through it's run. I still have the promotional 3e tee shirt advertizing the new system to be released in 2000.
I started before 3e of course but hated AD&D 2nd ed. I do have fond memories of playing the other game that's abbreviated "PF": Palladium Fantasy. But Palladium screwed up their game with a second edition. Fortunately 3e D&D was an amazingly good game. I became a good GM with 3e, although those skills carried over into some dusty old games our group took breaks with, like Cyberpunk and Star Wars d6. I have tried many other games but those are the only three I have ever been good at running : 3e, Cyberpunk, and Star Wars d6.
4e is NOT D&D. It may share names and such... but it doesn't play like D&D is supposed to at all. It's ok to play once in a while, but my love migrated over to Pathfinder when WotC moved on to a new system.
|
Started about 6 years ago. I can't remember if my first game was 3.5e D&D or Exalted, but I think it was the latter. I've played World of Darkness (mixed versions and supernaturals), Exalted (Solar & Abyssal), D&D 2e, D&D 3.5e, D&D 4e, Pathfinder, Savage Worlds, Battletech, and a few other games I can't think of right now.
I keep coming back to pathfinder (with the occasional pull from 3.5e into pathfinder) for the breadth of options built into the system from the get-go. Reading through the feats, classes and archetypes often inspires me to create certain kinds of characters. I may never get the chance to play them, but knowing I didn't have to negotiate for a rule to allow it is a great feeling.
Oddly enough, because of the combination of a math degree, a talent for breaking systems and a dash of brutal honesty, it is often me who decides whether something is okay or balanced rather than whoever happens to be DMing (which is me sometimes, but not always or even the majority of the time). Sadly this, as often as not, has me wincing and going "Err.. yeah. I'm kinda screwed here."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
4e is NOT D&D.
Can we please, please, PLEASE, pretty please -- with sugar on top and a female halfling -- NOT turn this into another g+~+#~ned "edition wars" thread? Yes, I get it. You and all your friends and their mothers hate 4e. Fine. Do you have to find an excuse to post about it in every thread, no matter how tangentially (or not at all) related?
I started with BECMI, then 1st Edition AD&D, then Second Edition AD&D, then 3.0, then 3.5, then Pathfinder. (I played in a 4.0 game long enough to develop a powerful aversion to it as***edited to try to avoid edition war***). (Yes, I'm old. Now get out of my yard!)
I was perfectly content with 3.5 and thought it was the perfect evolution of the game I grew up playing. It corrected everything that was wrong with previous editions--even if I hadn't seen the problems at the time. (What's wrong with THAC0!? That's how we've always done it, dagnabit!) Then that other company totally abandoned the game I grew up with and Paizo swooped in to the rescue. Now, in point of fact, *Pathfinder* fixes the few remaining problems with 3.5 and I'm never looking back.
That being said, the two are like 90% compatible, so I still get a great deal of use from my 3.5 books. I still use (or am willing to use) classes from the various supplements, like the "Complete" series, the Tome of Magic, the PHB2, etc.
To anyone who loves Pathfinder but also wants a good source for 3rd party stuff, I highly recommend you take a look at the resources from 3.5--there's a lot of good stuff there that fits seemlessly with Pathfinder.
Just my two coppers.
I removed a post and a reply to it. Let's keep things PG-13, please. Also, no edition wars, please.
Started playing in the mid 80s with mostly AD&D. Some Basic D&D in there too. Lots of 2nd edition (and other games) as a teenager after that. My gaming kind of dropped off after the 90s. When WotC was buying up all the good games just to make sure they never saw the light of day again it got rather disheartening. West End Games went bankrupt, the Star Wars prequels were disappointing, FASA went under and White Wolf killed off their world. Kind of stopped playing for awhile there and didn't get much exposure to 3rd edition. Tried to get my RPG fix in MMOs for awhile but it's just not the same. Video games are just too limited to do real dynamic RP. Trying to get back into things now but 3.5 still has too many little bugs and 4th edition just sucks.
Got the basic box in 1981 and moved up to AD&D within a couple weeks. Played through 2nd Ed., played through 3.x. Moved to Pathfinder.
Along the way, played and created many other games. But even some of those were still part of the d20 system.
Do you have to find an excuse to post about it in every thread, no matter how tangentially (or not at all) related?
Excuse me?! I don't even remember the last time I said anything about that. Posting one time in recent memory about a preference in a thread where the side topic was brought up already IS NOT posting about it in every thread! On top of that I never said I hate that game.
I expect you to apologize for lying about me. And hopefully that will end a flame war that shouldn't have even happened.
Do you have to find an excuse to post about it in every thread, no matter how tangentially (or not at all) related?Excuse me?! I don't even remember the last time I said anything about that. Posting one time in recent memory about a preference in a thread where the side topic was brought up already IS NOT posting about it in every thread! On top of that I never said I hate that game.
I expect you to apologize for lying about me. And hopefully that will end a flame war that shouldn't have even happened.
I was the one who brought up 4e not being D&D, it's not a bad game, it's just not D&D.
I say I played 3x because it really was a combo of 3e and 3.5e. I never upgraded my 3 corebooks to the 3.5 ones, but I had some of the 3.5 books like Fiend Folio, Book of Vile Darkness, and I'm not sure if Unearthed Arcana was 3.5 or not. I played infrequently, maybe 3 times a year in the latter half of the decade so it didn't matter too much if people had different corebooks. I vowed when 4e came out that owning 3 editions of the game was enough but I succumbed to Pathfinder. So I now vow that 4 editions of the game is enough! But will I fail my Will save when the inevitable day of Pathfinder 2.0 or D&D 5e comes out? I don't know...
Yes, I did play 3.5. Now I play Pathfinder.
I am currently playing an UA 3.5 Cloistered Cleric variant, which works very well with the current cleric rules.
I started with this back in 1980. I've played every edition since then up to 3.5, then jumped into Pathfinder.
First game I ever played was years ago with the 3.5 beginner's box set (don't know if that was the actual label...) DM'd by my brother in law. I didn't really continue with it, but I eventually started playing 3.5 in college. Played 4e maybe twice (not a fan but I'd play again if I thought the DM/group would be right for it) as well as some WoD. Eventually found Pathfinder and it is now my favorite. I play in a 3.5 group, and I love the campaign, but I think Paizo just got so many things right over 3.5 and sort of wish we were using PF.
|
|
Started in '79 with 1e, played that until I was put on ice for a bit (along with most WEG stuff, Shadowrun, Call of Cthulhu, Champions, Top Secret (original), Traveller, etc), played 3.0 then 3.5 in the Feds, got out and played 3.5 until the Beta rules came out in hardcopy, played Pathfinder for a bit until we started in on Kirthfinder.
|
DnD / Adv DnD / 3.5 DnD and now Pathfinder. Although many in my group have played both 3.5 and Pathfinder we play mostly PF games and very few DM's, in my group, allow 3.5 content in.
We also currently play :
Modern / Past / Future D20
Sidewinder D20
Star Wars D20
Marvel Super Hero's D10's
Blood and Vigiliant D20
I played 3.5. It was my reintroduction to the hobby by a good friend and neighbor. Played the heck out of it and loved it. Now very happy with PF.
Mostly 3.5, though I technically started with a few random forays into late 2nd and played with one of those awkward 3.0-3.5 transitional groups for a while.
I've also played a lot of nWoD (mostly changeling, but I've tried very system) and now I try to talk my group into playing every last game I've read. They mostly sigh, shake their heads and then shake me until I run another PF game. I think it's the earliest stages of creeping grognardism.
I started playing 2E. then 3.0 then 3.5 then pathfinder.
I feel the comparison in the rules is helpful in comprehension. I like to look at the evolution of the rules since 3.0.
|
|
Re changes between 2e and 3e compared with 3e and 4e, I only played a couple of sessions of what I guess was AD&D (not sure which edition) before getting into D&D with 3.5 and then 4e, but from what I get of people saying the changes seem to be of two different types:
Changes to the way the base mechanics work, e.g. THAC0 to 3e AC is a bigger change than 3e AC to 4e AC.
Changes to the way magic works, and also changes to the content that change the way the D&D world works, e.g. the change from 3e Vancian casting to 4e At Will and Encounter powers has more of an impact on the game world that presumably how magic in 2e worked (I assume it was Vancian as well).
From what I remember of my AD&D sessions, 4e is closer to 3e in terms of the former type of change - consistent core mechanic of d20 + Modifier versus a DC, Standard Actions and Move Actions etc (whereas in AD&D I remember thinking it felt like a lot of little subsystems bolted together, roll percentile for this, roll d20 and get high for that, roll d20 and roll under for the other etc).
So while I mechanically was able to pick up 4e pretty easily having played 3e, I admit that 4e's design did perhaps change stuff so the feel and approach to play may have changed, e.g. making some spells Rituals means Skills are first point of call to overcome some obstacles rather than magic, also the lack of Vancian casting means magicians always have magical spells to sling. Also the planes changed a lot form 3.5 to 4e (though not an issue for me as I play Eberron and the planes were different in 3.5 as well).
TL;DR
Depending on the type of change you are looking at "Structure of Mechanics" versus "Game World Impact of Mechanics" the differences between editions of D&D will seem greater or less.
Started out with good ol' 3.5, then tried out 4e before the DM changed from 3.5 to Pathfinder mid-game. I'm currently playing GURPS and a 3.5 game with some house-ruling. I'm curious about trying out 2e, though my group keeps joking about as all getting killed by the end of the second battle.
First RPG I bought was Red Basic D&D box, but I only played the solo adventure in it and couldn't find anyone else to play with at the time. Then got AD&D 2nd Ed, which I did eventually get to play, and much later I did indeed play 3.0 and 3.5 before switching to Pathfinder. I played a few demos of 4E but decided it wasn't for me.
In between all that I've also played in no particular order GURPS, BESM, Exalted, oWoD (in particular Wraith, Werewolf, Mage, and Vampire), Champions/HERO, Mutants and Masterminds, Legends of the 5 Rings (edition before current), and probably other stuff I'm forgetting.
Do you have to find an excuse to post about it in every thread, no matter how tangentially (or not at all) related?Excuse me?! I don't even remember the last time I said anything about that. Posting one time in recent memory about a preference in a thread where the side topic was brought up already IS NOT posting about it in every thread! On top of that I never said I hate that game. I expect you to apologize for lying about me. And hopefully that will end a flame war that shouldn't have even happened.
That's "you" collectively, viz. "you people who feel the need to turn every thread into more Edition Wars fodder." At least one of whom does indeed try to turn just about every thread into why they think 4e "isn't D&D."
And the rest of us, including the mods, are sick of it.
To avoid a flame war, just avoid edition war posts. It's pretty easy.
So what about the rest of you? Did you play 3.5, or did you come to Pathfinder as a completely new game? And if you started with Pathfinder rather than 3.5, did you play any other version of D&D before PF? Other RPGs?
I only play 3.5.
My RPG history:
1. AD&D and Basic/Expert D&D, Gamma World
2. AD&D 2e, Star Frontiers, Palladium Fantasy, Warhammer FRPG
3. Many year break
4. D&D 4e, also a little bit of Mouse Guard (Burning Wheel)
5. Pathfinder
I started with 3.5.
I started basically right when 3.0 came out. I still have the dungeon I drew for the first session that I ever DM'd, back in like 6th grade. We got through 4 rooms then lost interest and played Halo or something.
I didn't play much through 3.5. My friends and I tried some 4e soon after it came out but we lost interest after about 2 months and then started playing Pathfinder and never looked back. In our campaigns we always use 3.5 material since we have the books anyway, but our use of 3.5 stuff has been steadily declining.
I have also read all the rulebooks for old World of Darkness but never played it beyond one session of Mage:The Acension.
I started with Star Wars RPG very, very young (4-5 years old, if you can believe it). A few years later I found my dad's AD&D books and "pretended" to play the game with various friends. In high school I tried to get serious about it. 3.0 had just been released, but games always fell apart.
About 6 months ago, I realized I had enough RPG players in the family to start a real group. We started with 3.0 since we all had the books, briefly moved to 3.5, and in two weeks, we're starting PF. There's some great stuff in the rules I'm looking forward to, and a few things I'm nervous about. We'll see how it goes.
Let's see. Started with the Red Box around '86, maybe '87. Picked through 1.5 and 1E books, learned from them. Also learned from the BECMI (not so much the I). Went to 2E in high school, also did a little TMNT when it came out. Early college days continued 2E. Later add a little Rifts and Rolemaster. Went to 3E, pit-stop to revisit Rifts, then 3.5, now Pathfinder. Not a great variety of games, but some good times nonetheless.
I think the first rpg I actually touched was the old Marvel Superhero game. My older cousin eventually got us into AD&D 2nd edition, and we have played that as long as it has existed. Hopped on board for 3.0 and 3.5, but we still manage to come back to 2nd edition now and then. I'm not sure if it's purely nostalgia or what, but something about it still holds some magic for us. Just made the leap to Pathfinder a month ago, after wanting to do it for about a year, and have no regrets. I think it's fixed a lot of the things that irked me about the 3.x system. There are still some things about it I'm not keen on, but overall I'd probably say it's my favorite active system on the market today.
There's several other RPGs I've touched over the years, many of which I still play semi-regularly. Savage Worlds (most notably Hellfrost) is probably the most frequent, given how the mechanics are designed to be a sort of plug-and-play. I make my way into L5R about once every year and a half, fiddle with Deadlands, Warhammer (Rogue Trader and Dark Heresy), Unknown Armies, 7th Sea, and (even though it's not technically an RPG, I'm still gonna drop it in the mix) Talisman.
Started with AD&D in 1996, then 3.5 in 2003, then 4e in 2008 and finally Pathfinder in 2009, and currently playing it almost exclussively.
|
So this thread is pretty much confirming what I'd guessed from reading these forums. Probably 90% of people answering played 3.5 before Pathfinder. And this explains the 3.5-centric view that many of the posts here have. As a newbie to Pathfinder who hadn't played D&D since the 80's until recently, and never played 3.5, it just really stood out to me how many of the recommendations on these forums for things to include in a Pathfinder game come from 3.5 sources.
And yet, the 90% of people on these forums who started with 3.5 doesn't reflect my experience as a player. I've played PF with two groups since I started last month, and 3 of the 10 different people I played with in those groups had never played any RPG before, let alone 3.5. And I'm not sure of the gaming backgrounds of some of the other 7.
So my guess is that Pathfinder gets a lot more newbies than posters on these forums seem to realize, but it's most the die hards who have been playing for a while who are on this web site.
I got started with gaming at a VERY young age, and have been doing it my entire life. Both of my parents were gamers. It started with that one arcade game, with the busty blonde (very skimpily clad) princess you had to save, where the screen flashed on one side and you had to jerk the joystick in that direction. I can never remember what that was called... But I played it at 2 years old... When I understood math, I joined in several adventures in my parent's D&D group with AD&D. When they migrated to 3rd, so did I effectively. By 9 I was putting my own group together with my friends. And , like most people I migrated to 3.5 when it came out... Mainly because it was what everyone was playing. DragonLance will forever remain one of my favorite settings...
Then I lost all my groups, focused more on my TCGs, and occasionally have managed to join brief stints with various gaming groups my tcg friends are part of ever since. Got really involved in a locally produced RPG/TCG called Ryvah... It's got potential, but the creator has an ego complex that rivals religion (not to mention he flat out insulted my girlfriend infront of everyone constantly). After a while I just decided not to deal with him anymore. I actually regret spending time helping him develop the second set for his card game, and fleshing out his RPG...
In between I've played other RPGs. White Wolf stuff, Star Wars, Hero System and it's variants... Paranoia is a fun one :). I tried 4e.... I just didn't like how bloody pre-packaged it was. To be fair, I gave it about two months worth of weekly gaming.... I still think poor old Gary has rolled in his grave so much he's set his coffin aflame.
Luckily, I managed to join a Pathfinder group that consists mostly of an old 3.5 group of mine. It's been ages since I've had a week long gaming session like that, lol.
|
So my guess is that Pathfinder gets a lot more newbies than posters on these forums seem to realize, but it's most the die hards who have been playing for a while who are on this web site.
Hardly surprising. Most of us joined the forums around the time of the playtest, which was a rework of the 3.5 rules, and before that it was dedicated to the Dungeon and Dragon magazines, which were 3.5 material. It'd be more surprising if the majority of the forums HADN'T played 3.5.
Mine is wierd I started with 3.5 went to 4th for a tiny bit then played a second ed game then went to pathfinder.
I have played AD&D, 2e, 3e, 3.5e,4e, and pathfinder. 4e isn't a bad game, it just is not D&D. Pathfinder is my favorite by far.
3.5e isn't a bad game either, it just is not D&D.
I mean what's the deal with them getting rid of THACO and making a high AC good? Kiddies these days can't subtract anymore?
I probably have one of the rarer rpg histories. I started with 4th edition for only a few sessions, did one or two sessions of star wars saga, then stuck with 3.5 for about 9 months, finally wound up here at pathfinder.
Yes, I played 3.5 before PF.
Actually started with D&D 1998 or so (AD&D 2nd), switched to 3.0 when it became available, then 3.5, then PF.
Before that, since 1992 or '93 I played various other RPGs (Earthdawn, Shadowrun, White Wolf Games and others).
Pathfinder and 3.5 are the same.
3.0 a weapon had a size. You compared the size of the weapon with your character's size to determine how many hands it required. So a longsword, which is medium, would be a two-handed weapon for a halfling. Or a light weapon for an ogre. It makes picking up and using a weapon from a different sized monster easier.
Except, well, p.162 of the 3rd Edition DMG had the exact same size-damage scaling rule as 3.5 and Pathfinder, minus the penalty for inappropriate-sized weapons, including a specific example of "a Large version of a longsword".
This caused troublesome weapon proficiency interactions. Either you'd let a gnome druid buy a Small version of a scimitar, or you'd require that he wield a standard Medium scimitar with both hands. If the first, your human wizard would run out and commission a Medium or Large dagger. If the second, a halfling ranger can't two-weapon fight with a quarterstaff, because there's no equivalent Medium weapon.
3.5's Weapon Equivalency table (DMG p.27) did the pick-up-a-monster's-weapon just as well as 3rd, without causing 3rd's size/weapon proficiency headaches.