|
The thread about how many people allow 3.5 rules in their Pathfinder game got me wondering how many people are like me in never having even seen 3.5. I kinda wish I could make a poll like on most internet forums, but we'll just have to answer in messages instead.
Personally, I started playing RPG's with the D&D red and blue box Basic and Expert Sets in 1983, then moved on to AD&D, and then a few other 80's RPGs (Star Frontiers, original Star Wars RPG, Shadowrun). When my gaming group graduated high school and went our separate ways, I stopped playing RPGs. About two months ago, I became curious to see what D&D looks like today, so I checked out 4th edition. In hunting the web for local gaming groups, I ended up finding more people who prefer Pathfinder over 4e, so here I am, though I still want to play 4e too, as I have not yet decided for myself which I prefer.
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?
Yes.
Started with ADnD back in middle school. I switched over to 3.0 when it came out with a new group and we also adopted 3.5 when it came out. I have also played D20 modern, Star Wars Saga Edition, Mutants and Master Minds, Vampire, and 4E.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I DMed 3.5 for a couple of years, my group fell apart shortly before 4e came out. (Note if your DM has a high moral standing IRL, informing him about cheating on your fiance (who was also in the group and was a very close friend to me) does not have pretty results). Since then I hadn't been able to get a group, though I did thumb through 4e, and quickly decide it wasn't for me. I believe tieflings being a core race was the biggest shock to me in 4th greatly made worse by tieflings being very unsubtle (well looking like true hellspawn). IMO core races were intended to be ones that look like they can walk into most normal taverns, without the villagers wanting to grab their pitchforks. After deciding to go back to 3.5 when I finally had time and willing players again. I discovered pathfinder while looking for resources for it, and I don't think I will ever look back.
I actually played 3.0 long into the 3.5 era. I still used a number of 3.0 rules when I finally switched. I'm sure there are aspects of my Pathfinder game that still have 3.0/3.5 shades. I also adopt several house rules.
PS: Bring back weapon sizes. They make so much more sense.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
From my Paizo profile:
I started playing D&D as a kid in the late 70’s – good ol’ First Edition AD&D! We also played many other RPGs back then … Marvel Superheroes, Champions, Elfquest, FASA's Star Trek, Star Frontiers, the list goes on … but it always came back to AD&D for us!
I kind of faded out of gaming around the time 2nd Edition came out - mainly because most of my gaming friends turned into grown ups when I wasn't looking and moved away but also because 2nd Edition just didn't quite do it for me (although I did play it a little and there were aspects that I did like).
Third edition really pulled me back in though and the Pathfinder RPG has only made things better!
|
|
PS: Bring back weapon sizes. They make so much more sense.
???
I'm not sure how weapon sizes were handled in 3.0 or 3.5, but the concept of weapon sizes does exist in Pathfinder. That's why my halfling bard's weapon does less damage than a weapon of the same name used by a medium sized character - it's a smaller version of the same weapon, sized appropriately for a small character.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
My first introduction to tabletop RPGs was a heavily house-ruled 3.5 game with a GM who'd only ever been a player before and players who were ALL as green as I was.
Hilarity ensued.
Ironically, I haven't touched 3.5 since. Brief stint in 4E, then PFS.
I still mostly play 3.5. I just take the houserules I like from PF.
I did not play 3.5, or any other kind of tabletop; Pathfinder is what got me involved. I had always been interested, but I had a wonderful but overbearing mother who was wary of D&D (I came of age when the "scare" was at its height), so I never got a chance to play. As I got older, I got introduced indirectly via video games, and after a long and circulus journey, I started playing Pathfinder over the internet about 6 months ago. I love it - as someone who has always been attracted to complexity, I found (and continue to find) the system incredibly engaging. It's been a good outlet - as a graduate student, I'm in front of my computer working a lot, but pbp'ing doesn't necessarily suck up large amounts of time in a single go (although it can if I want it to).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Played 3.0 and 3.5.
I now only play Pathfinder, and allow no WoTC content in my Pathfinder games.
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.
Yes, among other things. :)
I hardly played 3.5 at all. Was playing White Wolf's games for the span the 3E lived. Several of players played 3.5 and convinced me to GM and game. Tried and found the Pathfinder Beta which I liked much better.
4e isn't a bad game, it just is not D&D.
Untrue. It's even in the title of the game.
started around 10+ years playing aD&D (night below box, still makes me cry) then we moved to 3.0 FR n stayed there `till pathfinder and we stayed there, tried 4ed but i realy dont like WoW so... ( ;P)
Started with basic dnd, merp, I think it was 85' or 86', then added 2nd ed, call of cathulu, rolemaster, 2300 ad, cyberpunk, and later 3.0, 3.5, ars magica.
About 25-26 years, some not so active as I would have liked them to be.
PS: Bring back weapon sizes. They make so much more sense.???
I'm not sure how weapon sizes were handled in 3.0 or 3.5, but the concept of weapon sizes does exist in Pathfinder. That's why my halfling bard's weapon does less damage than a weapon of the same name used by a medium sized character - it's a smaller version of the same weapon, sized appropriately for a small character.
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.
I started with 3.5 in high school back when it was fresh on the scene. I loved it from the first game, but life got busy for me and I took a hiatus. I played the HERO system for a while in college, and though I loved the amount of granularity it has I just got to the point where I didn't feel like combing through all those rules when I wanted to come home, veg out and play a game. So I checked out Pathfinder, and I've been pretty happy with it. It has that nostalgic flavor of 3.5 but improves a lot upon it.
AD&D
Gamma World
Box set D&D (Basic/Expert/Immortals)
2e
3.0e
3.5e
MERP
Rolemaster
Every Palladium Books title
Cyberpunk
Jovian Chronicles
Heavy Gear
HKAT
and now PF
I played 3.5....though I started with Basic and played evbery incarnation of the game since. And I have probably played(and still do) other RPGs systems.
|
|
Started with 1st Edition back in 1978. Used some 2nd Edition variables for a while, but mainly stayed with 1st Ed. Stopped playing for a time, but when we started up again, tried 3.0 then 3.5. Finally played 4e for about 2 1/2 years before deciding to try Pathfinder.
1st Edition is still a classic. But 3.5 was better. 4e was good for a while, until the tactics overwhelmed the role playing. Some of the encounters took way too long to play out. Decided to try Pathfinder earlier this year. Love it! It's an improved 3.5, making it far and away the best game system for Fantasy RPG available. I loved running Burnt Offerings. This is an instant classic, better than the Sunless Citadel; which I thought was great.
Burnt Offerings is rich and detailed. If I had any complaints, it would be that it needs to provide more dialog boxes for the players. The text is very DM centric with a lot for the DM and relatively little for the PCs. It was a bit difficult determining what information to give the PCs without revealing too much or too little. That part was tough. There is a lot to process for someone not familiar with the world and the adventures to follow. But the world and the encounters were what you would expect from the best RPGs; they are memorable. I look forward to an opportunity to run it again.
Sorry if this was more than you were asking.
Later,
Mazra
|
Been playing with the same gaming group for 10 years, we started out playing 3.0, then 3.5; once 4E came out none of us liked it and about that time I discovered Pathfinder. As a group we decided to play it and continue on with the game we love as opposed to a game we no longer recognized (that being 4E).
Now that there's more than enough stuff for the PFRPG, I have been able to wean the players in the game that I run off of 3.5 options and now the only thing that is close to 3.5 that we use is the Psionics Unleashed stuff from Dreamscarred Press, other than that it's all Paizo stuff.
|
|
Apart from a couple of sessions of AD&D that I played in, I really got into D&D with 3.5 (though I had been roleplaying for years before then).
I still play 3.5 now and prefer it to PF overall, plus it actually is D&D. I just play PF for PFS. I am going to start running the Freeport Trilogy using 3.5 in a couple of days and can't wait :)
|
|
Began with BECMI, had a short stint with AD&D 2e, spent most of the '90s playing Call of Cthulhu, had some games with WHFRPG, Rifts, Kult, got back to D&D with 3.0 and then 3.5 with various settings, been playing on-and-off games of Exalted, Artesia RPG (Fuzion based), FantasyCraft (low magic, Conan themed), DragonAGE, and once again AD&D 2e.
And obviously PFRPG, both in rules and setting, since the Alpha rI.
Started with 2nd Ed in the late 80s, players 3.0 and 3.5. I tried 4.0, but I just never could get into it. Started playing PF, and haven't looked back.
I have also players GURPS, Shadowrun(1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th ed), and Rifts.
I've been playing D&D since 1985 when I was asked to take over the character of someone who didn't show up for a session. I was hooked instantly. I started with 1st Edition AD&D and soon became enamored with the art/science/task/madness of DMing, and that's been my primary role ever since (at least with D&D).
I've only dabbled in other RPG's (not because I didn't like them, it's just that I rarely had time for anything else) but enjoyed Call of Cthulhu, Torg, Star Wars d20, various Star Trek incarnations, and the original Boot Hill and Gamma World games. I did play in a 12 year long DC Heroes campaign that to this day remains my all time favorite gaming experience. That game's GM no longer plays, and it's a shame. I'd pay hard money to get him to run a new DCH game again.
When WotC announced 4e, I was actually pretty bummed. My gaming group had collectively sunk hundreds, maybe even thousands into 3.5, along with 8 years of our time. Some of the guys played a few games with the 4e rules, and it was unanimously decided to not switch to them. When the Pathfinder rules came out, I was instantly hooked, not only because of the "3.75" changes, but that we could still, with a little tinkering, still use our 3.5 material.
Currently, I play in one PF campaign and DM another. I haven't regretted a moment of not going to 4e.
I've played all kinds of games, on that list, is 3.0 and 3.5.
I started with D&D Basic - the Pink box with EO art, B2 "Keep on the Borderlands", ugly orange set of dice with a white crayon). I then moved on to Expert (also with EO box art). After that was AD&D bliss, then 2nd edition, etc. I even played some of the original Gamma World and Star Frontiers (Alpha Dawn) at one point. TSR was great in it's day.
3E/3.5 was awesome except the emphasis on miniatures (I expected this from a munchkin company like WotC though) which to this day is the biggest drawback of running a game for me, even with Pathfinder. The constant stopping to draw out maps kind of takes you out of story mindset for a time. I miss the simpler days where imagination was more prevalent over tactical maps.
Anyway, 3E/3.5 still was another golden age of gaming for me. I even bought 3rd party stuff (for me that was a first) from Necromancer and Goodman. The wotc neverending splat with unbalanced classes killed it towards the end but if you stayed Core-only it was gaming nirvana.
YMMV.
|
|
I started with 3.5 in high school back when it was fresh on the scene. I loved it from the first game, but life got busy for me and I took a hiatus. I played the HERO system for a while in college, and though I loved the amount of granularity it has I just got to the point where I didn't feel like combing through all those rules when I wanted to come home, veg out and play a game. So I checked out Pathfinder, and I've been pretty happy with it. It has that nostalgic flavor of 3.5 but improves a lot upon it.
Wow, 3.5 has only been dead for four years. They have "nostalgia" already?
Sheesh, I knew things are moving faster these days, but that's fast!
:-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I thought the nostalgia was for 1st and basic??
Nonsense. Just look at the multiple sneak attacks thread, now there's some nostalgia.
I thought the nostalgia was for 1st and basic??
I think it can go as far as 2E as well. :)
[wildwestvoice]"Them were some good ol' Ravenlofty days back then". "Aw heck, Sigil was a nice place to kick back with a bottle o' Jack too."[/wildwestvoice]
|
I thought the nostalgia was for 1st and basic??I think it can go as far as 2E as well. :)
[wildwestvoice]"Them were some good ol' Ravenlofty days back then". "Aw heck, Sigil was a nice place to kick back with a bottle o' Jack too."[/wildwestvoice]
We only played one campaign in 2E, skills and powers came out and ruined the game for us. We went and started playing other games. Gurps fantasy being one of them. It was 3.0 that brought most of the group I game with back to D&D and then to skip to pathfinder not only because most of us did not care for 4E, but because we enjoyed the rules system, as it was. I have played with a few people who really enjoy 4E and have myself gone back and repurchased 1E books and some 2E books. And in fact own all the 2E books, they were a gift, even though I don't play the game right now.
Man I have played so many games over the years, Chill, Call of Ct'hulhu, Starwars in various editions, Rolemaster, Spacemaster, Cyberspace, James Bond, hero System in various editions and for many types of games, Cyberpunk 2020, Paranoia, Villains and Vigilantes, Car wars, Battletech, Paladium, Amber Diceless, Basic Dnd and every version of the game except 4th, traveler in several version, Toon, BESM, boothill, deadlands, fringeworthy, Morrow Project, Psiworld, Legacy the war of ages, Vampire, Werewolf, Mage and Hunter. I am sure I missed a game or two in there. My big beef these days and my nostalgia is that we are so limited in our thoughts on what games we can play and there are so many rules anymore its too hard to remember them all.
For DnD i started with 3.5 (or 3.0 if you count playing never winter nights as starting) but i was playing a lot of nWoD before that.
We began with AD&D and Gamma World, moved on from TSR to ICE when 2nd edition came out and tried various other systems from various other companies for a while.
We got back into 3.5 just after 4th edition was released (I saw a bunch of 3.5 Forgotten Realms sourcebooks on sale and picked them up for nostalgic reasons, together with most of the 3.5 books). We played a couple of campaigns but it didnt really appeal to us - during that period I found the Shackled City hardcover, then Paizo and got hooked on Golarion flavor material (getting rid of all those recently acquired FR books and most of the 3.5 books).
Pathfinder seemed a lot like 3.5 to us and we dont really have time to do it justice. Now we play 4th edition, though when I DM it's always set in Golarion and with pretty much exclusively Paizo adventures.
Started with 2nd edition, then advanced options, then switched between 3rd and a homebrew system for quite a few years, then went to 3.5, then 4th. Really didn't like 4th, so went back to homebrew. Then someone suggested pathfinder to me and have been doing that the last 2 years.
Yes, I played 3.5 D&D (last campaign ended maybe 6 months ago).
The thread about how many people allow 3.5 rules in their Pathfinder game got me wondering how many people are like me in never having even seen 3.5. I kinda wish I could make a poll like on most internet forums, but we'll just have to answer in messages instead.
Personally, I started playing RPG's with the D&D red and blue box Basic and Expert Sets in 1983, then moved on to AD&D, and then a few other 80's RPGs (Star Frontiers, original Star Wars RPG, Shadowrun). When my gaming group graduated high school and went our separate ways, I stopped playing RPGs. About two months ago, I became curious to see what D&D looks like today, so I checked out 4th edition. In hunting the web for local gaming groups, I ended up finding more people who prefer Pathfinder over 4e, so here I am, though I still want to play 4e too, as I have not yet decided for myself which I prefer.
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 played it before, for a number of years, and I still allow certain things in PF.
Started with AD&D, played Basic/Expert, and a bit of 2.0; tried about a zillion other systems (Traveler, Star Frontiers, Boot Hill, Top Secret, James Bond 007, Amber Diceless, etc., etc.); ended up playing a bizarre fusion of 1e/007 for years, until I switeched to 3.5 solely to experience Paizo's "Age of Worms" AP. I now play a version of Pathfinder that's been houseruled so extensively that it's a lot closer to the kind of fusion game I used to enjoy so well.