|
Now of course if you are able to play multiple games and you are able, and want, to play both then you are lucky. Some of us don't have that luxury and have to decide which game they will run. I am planning on buying the books but I think my group and I will continue with Pathfinder while maybe playing a game of D&D every now and then in the future.
How about you?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder. I don't need another system.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder. It's working for me, so no need to put it aside and start over collecting yet another expensive set of books.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Undecided. I'll collect both, unsure if I'll switch to DDN. But my game isn't strictly PF, more like 3.X. A combo of 3.5, PF and house rules. I plan on picking up the final DDN rules on release. Regardless, I'll collect both. I like my reading material :)
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think I will stick with Pathfinder. The APs are an ideal business model for my group, and I am ready to get off of the treadmill.
We might switch from the various OSRIC systems we play. I think the risk to pathfinder is pretty minimal in the short term - they seem more interested in capturing the pre-3.5 crowd to me.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've already dumped Pathfinder. Gone back to 4E D&D.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mostly play whatever game is being played by my local groups. That being said, I really like pathfinder. It gives me a nice range of classes, great lore, a diverse map... D&D 4th ed was fine to me, but I was really disappointed when they killed off my favorite goddess (Eilistraee), though to it's credit, I like how 4e runs paladins a lot more.
I plan to run DDN, but I'm guessing I'll still be playing Pathfinder.
I'd rather ditch Pathfinder altogether, but I doubt it will happen.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Once I wrap up the current pathfinder campaigns I have on the go I'll probably switch to D&D Next. I really want to play a D&D system without magic item dependency and stat bloat.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll give 5th edition D&D a look. I might buy the books if i like what I see. I''ll be willing to play a game or two to see what it is like. I will most likely stick with Pathfinder. I am generally happy with the stories Paizo is writing for the Pathfinder game (APs campaign setting stuff etc).
I have to see what DDN looks like. And it has to be pretty awesome for a change. We lost the love and faith after everything they did to the Realms in 4E.
We love everything about pathfinder in my house.
(although it might be fun to fight a beholder again... wait who am I kidding, as an adventurer I say no it would not be!)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I checked a lot of the play test packets and gave some feedback - been playing DnD editions side 1982/Basic and Advanced…
Note: the following is a potted, jumbled set of personal opinions. They cannot be "wrong". They may be misrepresenting something about the system as you see it, but they are my own conclusions.
I played a couple of PbP's here using the most recent Playtest. Hated it with a passion, though the other players seemed to like it a lot - something about "bounded accuracy" or other…
I loathed the advantage/dsisdvantage mechanic - basically made everything happen all the time and made combat not very exciting...
I also found the whole approach of mashing past editions to combine some of my least favorite aspects of those past editions and not really focus on any of those aspects well. The mutliclassing seemed like a no-brainer - if you didn't you were lame compared to those that did. Which sucked, and I love multi classing.
Note also that my experience was with low level play, and one of my characters was a druid who could continually cast thunder strike or something - seemed way overpowered, the flavor was cumbersome (a thunderclap that could be heard out to 300'? - I had to keep reminding the GM that this was giving away our location to bad guys) and was kinda spammy.
I also disliked the art team's approach to many of the iconic monsters on the Wizard's website, and felt they kinda gravitated to the depictions I liked the least. Which is a very important thing for me - aesthetic representation. I'm very happy with Pathfinder's art approach - occasionally it doesn't do it for me, but mostly it's great. Having said that, some of the artwork for 5e looks phenomenal.
I'll be interested to see the finalized edition. Pretty sure I won't be playing it. The greatest interest in 5e I have is whether they have an OGL or a GSL. If it's OGL I'll be waaaaaaay ore interested in getting involved with the system….
Oh, and I actually like much of 4e's mechanics, I just consider it a very different game and style of play to 3.5 and PF.
I loved the default setting of 4e, and wish there was more for it. I loathe the Realms with all my black Zhentil heart, so I'm not really sure what happened to it in 4e, 3.5 or 2e (an edition which I also loathed.) (Sorry LadyIrithyl!)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sticking with pathfinder here. My group doesn't like learning new rule sets, the APs have been a big help to keep running games as life gets more hectic, and if I was going to switch systems, it would be to something rules-lighter like FATE.
Switch up.....Need more pace in my games
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would try it, but unless it is really good, I dont see myself leaving PF.
Of course they best make some good modules
And you have to play both games differently, because they are!
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm no longer bound to just one game. I find enjoyment in almost all RPGs I've played at some point or another. There's plenty of room on my bookshelf for more games. I, personally, want to experience as many different games as possible.
May everyone have fun with their game of choice =)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll stay with Pathfinder. Me and the people in my group own a sizeable collection of 3.5 and PF material. We don't need another High Fantasy RPG system.
I thought the whole point of NEXT was that it would allow for playing multiple systems at the same time (as unlikely as that sounds). IF Next is compatible with 3.5 shouldn't I just be able to still play Pathfinder?
I don't think that was ever the point of D&D Next. It was more to create the best version of D&D they can that captures the "essence of D&D" by taking some of the best aspects of all prior editions along with new ideas and distilling them into a single game.
Even though it isn't compatible with 3.5 the way Pathfinder is, I think that with this system it will be fairly easy to convert old adventure content into D&D Next. For instance I did a conversion of the Second Darkness AP to 4th edition, and it worked out fairly well, but I think it will be easier to convert a pathfinder AP to D&D Next than to 4E. So if down the road I decide I want to run another pathfinder AP I will likely run it using D&D Next rules, as I think doing so would be fairly pain free conversion task, and I think I will enjoy the mechanics of Next better than Pathfinder.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I haven't checked it out yet, but I can't see myself switching again. Switching to Pathfinder was painful already, and that was a cross-compatible system.
Besides, Paizo's got my trust as a consumer. Wizards (and Hasbro) just...doesn't.
I'll be sticking with 4e.
No doubt I'll continue playing PF, 5e, and other rpgs occasionally.
I'll probably be sticking with Pathfinder...but I would be willing to play D&D Next...probably depending on the group.
My group's been playing Next since the beginning of the playtest, so I'm not sure if "switching to" is very accurate, but I'll be using the finished product unless WotC totally drops the ball with the final product. (Always a possibility.) WotC has also mentioned publishing a 3.5 to next conversion pamphlet, which, given the similarity of the systems, seems about as necessary as a British English to American English translation guide; Whether they do or not, I'll still use the same amount of Paizo material I do now.
I dunno. New editions come about since new rulebook sets sell well. This is just because so many buy without checking. No more, I say. Another generic fantasy system where I get to pay for another set of minotaur stats and fireball? No thanks. Another DM guide + Player's guide + single adventure for a few of the old TSR properties? No thank you.
They want my money, they better try something new. Advantage and a save for each stat isn't going to do it either.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm likely to stick with PF, even though I'll buy the core 5e books as I have every edition since I was a kid. I'd even support a new edition of PF, even one that might make a significant departure from the current edition. For me, Paizo has earned a lot of good will, and with Kobold's Midgard setting and Frog Gods' work, there's a lot of good stuff for me to keep buying.
I do like that each stat is a target for attack/effects. No more 5 stats, hopefully
Well, I have decided that PF just isn't the right system for me. If WOTC can actually accomplish their stated goal of making the core experience of Next extremely simple (I have heard that they are expecting the core game to be not much more complicated than Basic D&D) but still robust/supported enough for me to play for a long time just using those simple rules then Next would become my game of choice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll definitely buy the books at the very least.
I think I will look for 5e games as a player but not sure I'll DM it.
Impossible to say until I've seen the final rules.
My group's been playing Next since the beginning of the playtest, so I'm not sure if "switching to" is very accurate, but I'll be using the finished product unless WotC totally drops the ball with the final product. (Always a possibility.) WotC has also mentioned publishing a 3.5 to next conversion pamphlet, which, given the similarity of the systems, seems about as necessary as a British English to American English translation guide; Whether they do or not, I'll still use the same amount of Paizo material I do now.
A 3.5 to DDN conversion guide would be nice. My game is 3.x currently and a look at relative ease / difficulty of conversion would be good to have...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
More or less dumped Pathfinder. I will play it but not DM it. More likely to stick with OSR games like Castles and Crusades and I found a 1st ed game starting tomorrow night. Probably buy D&DN core books just because but unless it is mind blowingly good probably not going to buy a vast amount.