So Who Is Still Playing Pathfinder 1st Edition

[W E Ray]

Melkiador wrote:

I just use cooperative rolling, where everyone rolls a stat array and you can pick from anyone’s array. You just have to keep the arrays on hand in case you need to add a character.

.

This is BRILLIANT!

Holy Gygax, I love the Boards!

[TriOmegaZero]

W E Ray wrote:

And I disallow Occult Adventures mostly because I haven't learned the system. Eventually I'll be in the mood to really read it in depth, build a few PCs, and introduce an NPC or two in my campaign. Then, once I know the rules a bit for OA, I can allow it.

The little that I've seen in play -- two character builds I saw in different games when visiting other groups -- were quite unbalanced.

But the little OA perusing I've done shows good balance. .... So I assume it's mostly balanced but, as with several gaming books across the decades, there's a few things here and there that are 'too good to be kept.'

It's one of the freshest set of options in Pathfinder, but like most of the system a knowledgable player can optimize the heck out of a character with them. It will change your game, but for better or worse depends on your players, per the norm.

[Dragon78]

Are there any spells that you guys flat out ban from your game?

Any magic items that you don't allow?

[spacemonkeyDM]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

W E Ray wrote:

And I disallow Occult Adventures mostly because I haven't learned the system. Eventually I'll be in the mood to really read it in depth, build a few PCs, and introduce an NPC or two in my campaign. Then, once I know the rules a bit for OA, I can allow it.

The little that I've seen in play -- two character builds I saw in different games when visiting other groups -- were quite unbalanced.

But the little OA perusing I've done shows good balance. .... So I assume it's mostly balanced but, as with several gaming books across the decades, there's a few things here and there that are 'too good to be kept.'

It's one of the freshest set of options in Pathfinder, but like most of the system a knowledgable player can optimize the heck out of a character with them. It will change your game, but for better or worse depends on your players, per the norm.

I enjoy the flavor of the builds in OA, it adds a lot to the game.

Like everything with pathfinder, I grumbled about more rules and embrace it.
I love the equipment section out of OA. Things like the occult items and gunslingers to me set the tone of pathfinder. It is a slightly off kilter high fantasy game. There is clockwork machines, robots, lazers, devil worshippers, pirates and spirit boards.

[TriOmegaZero]

Dragon78 wrote:

Are there any spells that you guys flat out ban from your game?

Any magic items that you don't allow?

Wall of Thorns is on thin ice with me, but not banned yet. :P Nothing else springs to mind off the top of my head except maybe Blood Money.

[Greylurker]

Dragon78 wrote:

Are there any spells that you guys flat out ban from your game?

Any magic items that you don't allow?

Our group has a GM who banned Commune with Nature on the grounds that it can be used to disrupt the economy of the setting

[Gorbacz]

You folks allow emergency force sphere? Living dangerously, I see.

[Gorbacz]

Greylurker wrote:

Dragon78 wrote:

Are there any spells that you guys flat out ban from your game?

Any magic items that you don't allow?

Our group has a GM who banned Commune with Nature on the grounds that it can be used to disrupt the economy of the setting

I hope they banned blood money , because if not, that CwN ban would be the most pointless one ever :)

[Saithor]

Been playing 1st edition the past four years. Will probably continue to do so well into the future. Gestalts, Paths of War, Spheres, not likely to run out of content for a long while.

[TriOmegaZero]

Gorbacz wrote:

You folks allow emergency force sphere? Living dangerously, I see.

I have run PCs out of spell slots available for it.

[W E Ray]

I allow all spells from the Core and APG. Other Spells I really need to see first, but it seems like I allow all(most) from UM. Outside of that I don’t allow it — except if you bring it to my attention outside of game — and I compare it with the ‘good’ same-Level spells from the Core. So if you want a 3rd Level spell from UC or New Paths or some splat book, I’ll look with you at Dispel Magic and Fireball and Fly and such. We’ll see if the 3rd Level spell you want is on par with those from the Core. I try to say ‘Yes.’

[Anguish]

Gorbacz wrote:

You folks allow emergency force sphere? Living dangerously, I see.

Strangely while it does get used occasionally, it's never been a problem at my table.

[TriOmegaZero]

I'm perfectly fine with a wizard prepping it for emergencies. I'm especially fine with a sorcerer spamming it in a high difficulty adventure. Judicious application makes it bearable.

[Greylurker]

Gorbacz wrote:

Greylurker wrote:

Dragon78 wrote:

Are there any spells that you guys flat out ban from your game?

Any magic items that you don't allow?

Our group has a GM who banned Commune with Nature on the grounds that it can be used to disrupt the economy of the setting

I hope they banned blood money , because if not, that CwN ban would be the most pointless one ever :)

Oddly it's never come up, because none of us have ever used Blood Money.

although I have been getting a stink eye over how many times my Bard casts Apparent Treachery. The enemies in the place we are attacking right now use a lot of teamwork feats

[MaUC]

Melkiador wrote:

As that conversation began, we will almost all move on eventually. As fun and varied as playing an Oracle is, given enough games you will eventually have done everything with it you ever wanted to do. And the same goes for every other combination that you actually want to try/play. Most of us just don’t play at such a pace as to hit that point yet.

While it's probably true that we'll all move on eventually... Move on to what is a different story.

The players I know that got tired of PF1 (or just want to take a break) generally move to 5e. My own groups, specifically, play FFd6 or Savage Worlds on occasion.

Besides, between 3pp and homebrew, it's really easy to extend the life of any game. There's a lot of PF1 material I have never used (or at least, certainly not enough to get tired of it) and my group has some really skilled and prolific homebrewers. :)

[Ryan Freire]

MaUC wrote:

Melkiador wrote:

As that conversation began, we will almost all move on eventually. As fun and varied as playing an Oracle is, given enough games you will eventually have done everything with it you ever wanted to do. And the same goes for every other combination that you actually want to try/play. Most of us just don’t play at such a pace as to hit that point yet.

While it's probably true that we'll all move on eventually... Move on to what is a different story.

The players I know that got tired of PF1 (or just want to take a break) generally move to 5e. My own groups, specifically, play FFd6 or Savage Worlds on occasion.

Besides, between 3pp and homebrew, it's really easy to extend the life of any game. There's a lot of PF1 material I have never used (or at least, certainly not enough to get tired of it) and my group has some really skilled and prolific homebrewers. :)

I'm beginning the laborious process of converting against the giants to pathfinder, as modules to weave into the giantslayer AP

[JiCi]

I'll be playing PF1 for a while still. The reason is simple: 2e essentially pushed the reset button over 10 years worth of material and now I have to wait until some of my favorite classes come back...

I'm not mad at all that they decided to upgrade their rules which were using the aging D20 system, I'm just mad that they "went back to Square 1" instead of "Square 5", on 10 [square] years. I would have taken the equivalent of half of PF1's material converted to 2e for Year 1, the second half for Year 2 and THEN some new material for Year 3.

It's like playing your favorite MMORPG up until the very last expansion, in which you built a brand new character with a new race and class added with that expansion, only for a proper sequel to roll in, and not being able to bring your prequel character, because they didn't implement any new material.

My favorite class is the Occultist, but not only is that class missing in 2e, but Paizo themselves also admitted that it was one of the more difficult classes to emulate as of now even with multiclassing.

So yeah, until just about everything from 1e is converted into 2e, I might stick to 1e. I'll reiterate: I'm for a 2nd edition of Pathfinder, but I'm vocally angry at the sheer lack of returning stuff from 1e. There are 40 classes in 1e, would it have been too much trouble to make sure that at least 20 of them return for PF2e Year 1, be as a separate class, specialization or whatnot?

[strayshift]

Our group still are and will be for the foreseeable future - too much cash invested in it. We play 2 homebrew campaigns and are still filling in two other paizo campaigns (Crimson Throne and Kingmaker) - we have 4 dms out of the 6 players.

[Andrew the Warwitch]

For our area, we still try to run PFS1 Sunday afternoons as well as I am running Rise of the Runelords and playing a Dhampir Anti-paladin in Hell's Vengeance.

[pjrogers]

Anguish wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

You folks allow emergency force sphere? Living dangerously, I see.

Strangely while it does get used occasionally, it's never been a problem at my table.

The key weakness with emergency force "sphere" is that it's only a hemisphere. It's no use to a flying caster.

[deuxhero]

W E Ray wrote:

Dragon78 wrote:

House Rules I don't like. -Not allowing classes.

.

I disallow Gunslinger completely.

And I disallow Occult Adventures mostly because I haven't learned the system. Eventually I'll be in the mood to really read it in depth, build a few PCs, and introduce an NPC or two in my campaign. Then, once I know the rules a bit for OA, I can allow it.

The little that I've seen in play -- two character builds I saw in different games when visiting other groups -- were quite unbalanced.

But the little OA perusing I've done shows good balance. .... So I assume it's mostly balanced but, as with several gaming books across the decades, there's a few things here and there that are 'too good to be kept.'

OA doesn't really require that much learning if you're just taking player options from it. The only real difference for psychic casting is the component changes. A lot of things look complicated, but are very close to existing material (Psychic is in almost every way a Sorcerer with different bloodlines and a worse spell list. Mesmerist is pretty easy to understand too.) Most of the book is GM material.

As for balance... I'm bad at remembering off hand what book things come from that aren't classes, but the classes are all over the place. Psychic is still as broken as a Sorcerer that only has the hardcover books and becomes nuts with Rebirth discipline and or amnesiac archetype (Repeatedly spontaneously casting your entire list with just a small failure chance in your way? What could possibly be broken about that?!). Spiritualist is a mostly worse unchained summoner, unless you abuse the slightly different deliver touch spells ability (you can do it at a distance) and Phantom Fighter feat (Your not Eidolon is now incorporeal with a ghost touch attack, which most monsters are totally incapable of doing anything about). Kinietict has a vast gap between power ceiling (Telekinetist is a solid all around class) and floor (You can be useless from a bad element pick, or the bad guys learn about you and grabbing resist energy). There's also a combo that requires being level 20 and lets you instantly become the Tarrasque (or whatever high level monster you face) with decent reliability. It only requires using a spell from OA and ability from OA exactly as they were intended to be used (the only complication is the two are in different classes, but it's an easy dip). Medium is just an utter mess of design that slipped by playtesting entirely thanks to a fundamental change (originally we were told there would be more than the 6 spirits we got in the future) that, to my memory, wasn't tested.

[Marc Waschle]

I still play PF1 in a Podcast with some friends, but for the most part in my home games as well as Convention play I am playing and running PF2 and Starfinder. Still in join PF1, still have loads of APs, but REALLY like the new mechanics in PF2 and the stories in Starfinder.

[magnuskn]

Dragon78 wrote:

So who is still playing first ed? Are you currently playing? If so, what are you playing(AP, Module, Home brew, etc.)and what race and class are you and your group playing?

Our current AP is Strange Aeons.

I am playing a Spiritualist(Phantom Blade)(M)

The rest of the party is a Aquatic Elf Swashbuckler(F), Human Barbarian(F), Ratfolk Witch(M), and Human Gunslinger/Alchemist(Gun Chemist)(M).

GM'ing two campaigns, Shattered Star (finishing, starting Hell's Rebels next) and Curse of the Crimson Throne (starting, first module). Going strong and already planned out for the next six years at least, one Starfinder campaign included.

[W E Ray]

Ryan Freire wrote:

I'm beginning the laborious process of converting Against the Giants to Pathfinder, as modules to weave into the Giantslayer AP.

.

A gazillion of us have done this over the years and I'm confident in all but guaranteeing that a good conversion or four is on the Boards here somewhere. Depending on whether you used the word "laborious" as a pejorative and are dreading the work of conversion, or whether you see it as a labor of love and are lustily looking forward to it -- you may want to go through the Boards Archives to find a few or start a Thread asking about it.

[Dragon78]

"Lustily looking forward to it", I like that one;)

[Shivok]

Starting up two more 1E campaigns. Strange Aeons and a Dark Sun homebrew called Mindmage Ascendancy. I have a War of the Crown re-imagined AP called Interregnum as well but I'm saving that for later.

[Volkard Abendroth]

pjrogers wrote:

Anguish wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

You folks allow emergency force sphere? Living dangerously, I see.

Strangely while it does get used occasionally, it's never been a problem at my table.

The key weakness with emergency force "sphere" is that it's only a hemisphere. It's no use to a flying caster.

The key weakness of the Force Sphere is that it blocks the caster's line of effect and requires a standard action to dismiss.

If opponents really want the caster, they simply stand 5' away and ready actions.

[TriOmegaZero]

Dimension Door/Dimensional Slide was a large cause of the PCs running out of slots for EFS in my experience.

[Tsukiyo]

Just moved to Auckland, New Zealand. Hoping to find some neophytes to run through Rise of the Runelords.

[Dragon78]

Speaking of other countries then the US, I wonder what countries outside the US that Pathfinder sold the best in? Or at least very well?

[Virginia J.]

Ok, two things here:

1. I had to remove a lot of posts that were part of a conversation that wasn't following Sara Marie's previous moderation.

2. I understand mental health is important, I truly do, but here ain't the place to hash out semantics about a specific use of a word.

[Dragon78]

Looks like a missed something interesting.

[GRuzom]

Dragon78 wrote:

So who hear still playing Pathfinder 1st Ed, play together in person(not online) with your gaming group?

Me - two different groups on alternete tuesdays.

[Bellona]

Wow, how did I miss this thread when it first started?!?

(Probable answer: because I was hanging out on the FFG Star Wars boards.)

Anyway, I am still playing PF1 (for me 1e refers to AD&D 1e), and do not foresee playing PF2.

I am currently running three PF1 games, all of them tabletop (long sessions, usually once per month).

1. Rise of the Runelords:
* Male Dwarf Bard/Ranger dip/Eldritch Knight.
* Male Human URogue/Fighter dip.
* Male Elf Evoker ... with Shalelu as a cohort.
* Male Elf Fighter/Oracle dip.

This group will be tackling Jade Regent next.

2. Rise of the Runelords (yes, I'm running two different groups through this AP!):
* Male Half-Orc Barbarian (invulnerable rager) ... with Enga Keckvia as a cohort.
* Male Human Magus (kensai) dip/Fighter (Aldori defender)/Duellist multi-class horror.
* Male Human Magus/Cleric/Mystic Theurge.
* Female Ratatosk (home-brew version) Druid (menhir savant).

This group will be tackling Curse of the Crimson Throne next.

3. Crypt of the Everflame, about segue weirdly into Mummy's Mask:
* Female Half-Orc Slayer.
* Female Elf Bard.
* Female Elf Oracle (ancient lorekeeper) ... likely to be changed for MM.
* Male Elf Fighter ... likely to be changed for MM.

Other games in which I participate as a tabletop player (not GM), all of which tend to be even more infrequent than the ones which I GM:
* 3.x Planescape-based gonzo campaign (all supplements!)
* Tribe8 (Silhouette system)
* Star Wars Saga Edition (on a slight hiatus)
* Star Wars FFG Force and Destiny

Other games in which I participate via play-by-forum-post (to distinguish it from the days of real play-by-post - yes, the turns had to be posted - using stamps - in the post box back then!):
* Star Wars FFG Clone Wars AU
* Star Wars FFG Old Republic/Revan's War
* Star Wars FFG in a period between the (newly introduced) High Republic and Ep. 1

(Yep, three different forum post games.)

Rule sets for PF1 ...

* Pathfinder Unchained: Unchained classes, fractional bonuses, background skills (plus Lore and Artistry), combat stamina (Fighters only, basic feat is free for Fighters, only combat tricks based on the Fighter's bonus class feats).
* The Advanced X Guides, Ultimate X, and X Adventures rules are a bit of a mixed bag, and I will severely prune their availability in the new APs.
* Golarion-based crunch only if it fits the character concept. "No, I'm not allowing your Garundi mermaid character with traits from both Avistan and Tian Xia, not to mention an archetype found only on the steppes of Casmaron, who uses an Arcadian magic item and ..."

While I'm open to importing good ideas from PF2, I'm sticking with the PF1 chassis. My bookshelves do not need another set of rulebooks.

[blahpers]

Argh, this thread! I've finally got enough spare moments to set up and run Strange Aeons for some friends and . . . well, you know. Maybe I should look into Roll20 again.

"There was time now! There was—there was all the time I needed! It's not fair!"

[darth_borehd]

I play in multiple groups. All of them tried or at least looked over Pathfinder 2.0 and were severely under-impressed to put it mildly.

The general consensus was that 1st edition is still far superior so we have no plans on changing.

[glass]

Melkiador wrote:

Strangely, book sales aren’t always an indication of how many people are playing a game and vice versa. I used to own many 4E books but never got to play a single game of it. Yet there are probably people who played multiple 4E campaigns but never bought a book for it.

I was almost in the latter camp. I was playing and/or running 4e on a weekly basis, and I only had a handful of books. Which turned out to be an issue when they shut down DDi at the end of last year; we did not have the books necessary to kep playing the characters. We could have tracked them down (assuming they are available in PDF, which I think they are). But instead we converted to PF1 (ironically, I had been adapting Rise of the Runelords to 4e, so that change actually made my life a little easier in some respects).

Dragon78 wrote:

So who here still playing Pathfinder 1st Ed, play together in person(not online) with your gaming group?

I was, until Coronavirus put paid to it. Now we are playing online, using Discord and Googles Sheets.

On the upside, since none of us have much else to do at the moment, we have gone from alternating our two campaigns week about to playing both weekly on different nights.

Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:

I'm all for house rules but I have to restrain myself because at some point there will be alterations to just about everything, and I don't feel my players should have to double check everything in case there are some relevant house rules.

This one strikes a chord, also. I had a 10 page house rule document, that was still not complete. So I chucked it and started over with just the essentials.

Ironically, the new house rule document has grown to 6 pages, but only the first page of that is general housreules. It then goes on to cover specific things that may not be applicable to specific games (for example, there is a set of houserules for games with only two players and a GM, featuring more generous point buy, the 3.5 gestalt rules, and such like).

_
glass.

[Chaotic_Blues]

I am currently running a pathfinder group (table top). Heck we even managed to introduce two new players to the Pathfinder side of the game.

We manage to play once a week baring plagues, and unforeseen events. That said with the current Stay at Home Order in one of the counties most of my players live in, the game is currently delayed.

[Dairfaron]

Dragon78 wrote:

So who is still playing first ed? Are you currently playing? If so, what are you playing(AP, Module, Home brew, etc.)and what race and class are you and your group playing?

Our current AP is Strange Aeons.

I am playing a Spiritualist(Phantom Blade)(M)

The rest of the party is a Aquatic Elf Swashbuckler(F), Human Barbarian(F), Ratfolk Witch(M), and Human Gunslinger/Alchemist(Gun Chemist)(M).

What a coincidence! We are also playing Strange Aeons right now.

I am playing a male half-drow Spellslinger Wizard 3, Vivisectionist Alchemist 1, Arcane Trickster 1 and Evangelist of Tanagaar 4 (with Arcane Trickster as aligned class). I know that is a lot to take in but it synergizes very well.

The other players are a Human Shaman, a Duergar Kineticist, an Elf Magus and a Half-elf investigator/swashbuckler.

So far we've had a lot of fun and there is still so much 1st Edition material to explore!

[Artofregicide]

I've started running a 25 point buy, gestalt solo playthrough of WotR for my spouse in 1e, as well as a RoW campaign on Roll20 in 1e as well.

My conversion of HR to 2e is still going strong too.

[Dragon78]

Our group is still playing...knock on wood.

[Toxie2725]

We're sticking with pf1. Well, actually we JUST converted from 3.5!

That said,v2 has some interesting things but because of how v2 has treated wild shape and magic in general we're not switching.

A small aside, but I cannot for the life of me understand walking away wholesale from a successful product like 1e. It's good to expand, but many people are going to stick with 1e...

[Haldrick]

The group I play with are sticking with 1st Edition.

We have just finished Serpents Skull and will start Giant Slayer or Hell's Vengeance with that GM.

We are 2/3 way through Kingmaker. That GM has Wraith of the Righteous to run.

I am half way through running Jade Regent and have Iron Gods, War for the Crown and Rise of the Runelords (AE) to run.

We also have the hardback CotCT and Emerald Spire

This lot will keep us busy till the 2030's
We tried the play test. It didn't turn us off like 4th ed D&D did bot the changes were not "Wow we have to chuck away £100's of stuff to start a new edition.

[Rysky]

Toxie2725 wrote:

We're sticking with pf1. Well, actually we JUST converted from 3.5!

That said,v2 has some interesting things but because of how v2 has treated wild shape and magic in general we're not switching.

A small aside, but I cannot for the life of me understand walking away wholesale from a successful product like 1e. It's good to expand, but many people are going to stick with 1e...

You actually have your answer in your post, you just started Pathfinder 1, the designers have had to deal with that ruleset for over a decade, which was an evolution of a different company’s ruleset rather than something truly their own.

Also how successful, and continued success, is a question that also factored into them starting a new edition.

[Qualidar]

1) I'm running Rise of the Runelords. We'll be starting book 3 when we get back to it, but we alternate between this and playing StarFinder, and we're midway through the 3rd Dead Suns adventure. Moved that from in-person to Fantasy Grounds now, given the situation. We'll be doing RotR on Roll20 once we start that back up. Sticking with 1e for this, as I've had bad receptions to moving campaigns between editions in the past. Still a possibility we might go 2e once players have more experience with it, if high level 1e is too difficult for them.

2) Different group was playing Iron Gods IRL, but as one of the three players isn't able to make the switch to digital we've put that on hiatus for now. I was running that in 1e, and I would love to be running it in 2e, but there's a lot of work in that conversion: androids as a race, technological stuff, etc. Might feel more up to it once we finally get back to it.

3) Given the collapse of that game, I started a new one to take its place with players from each group: a 2e conversion of Age of Worms, played on Roll20. Just a couple sessions in, and having a great time! It's pretty dungeon-heavy, which lends itself well to online play, and all the player-ready maps are available out there from the supplemental adventure PDFs that were released at the time. Good stuff!

[Greylurker]

We just started up Hell's Rebels on Fantasy Grounds.

Myself - Jessy Hellfire - Tiefling Barmaid and gun for Hire (Swashbuckler(Picaroon) and once I hit 2nd level Alchemist(Alchemical Sapper))
a Great big bloody Scotsman (Fighter)
A Paladin of Shelyn
and an Summoner with an Azata

Just finished the Livery and are thinking about where we stand against the local tyranny.

Once the GM is used to using Fantasy Ground he's going to pick up War for the Crown where we left off.

[Dragon78]

Our group is still playing but online because of the "bug".

[Toxie2725]

Rysky wrote:

Toxie2725 wrote:

We're sticking with pf1. Well, actually we JUST converted from 3.5!

That said,v2 has some interesting things but because of how v2 has treated wild shape and magic in general we're not switching.

A small aside, but I cannot for the life of me understand walking away wholesale from a successful product like 1e. It's good to expand, but many people are going to stick with 1e...

You actually have your answer in your post, you just started Pathfinder 1, the designers have had to deal with that ruleset for over a decade, which was an evolution of a different company’s ruleset rather than something truly their own.

Also how successful, and continued success, is a question that also factored into them starting a new edition.

It's one thing to start something new, and quite another to abandon it altogether. 3.5/pathfinder etc have been popular for thirty years. It's popular for a reason.

[Gorbacz]

Toxie2725 wrote:

Rysky wrote:

Toxie2725 wrote:

We're sticking with pf1. Well, actually we JUST converted from 3.5!

That said,v2 has some interesting things but because of how v2 has treated wild shape and magic in general we're not switching.

A small aside, but I cannot for the life of me understand walking away wholesale from a successful product like 1e. It's good to expand, but many people are going to stick with 1e...

You actually have your answer in your post, you just started Pathfinder 1, the designers have had to deal with that ruleset for over a decade, which was an evolution of a different company’s ruleset rather than something truly their own.

Also how successful, and continued success, is a question that also factored into them starting a new edition.

It's one thing to start something new, and quite another to abandon it altogether. 3.5/pathfinder etc have been popular for thirty years. It's popular for a reason.

So is 5e, and it has ditched 3.5, shot it repeatedly in the head and let it die by the wayside.

Also, 3.5 dates to 2000, so it's 20 years.

[Rysky]

Toxie2725 wrote:

Rysky wrote:

Toxie2725 wrote:

We're sticking with pf1. Well, actually we JUST converted from 3.5!

That said,v2 has some interesting things but because of how v2 has treated wild shape and magic in general we're not switching.

A small aside, but I cannot for the life of me understand walking away wholesale from a successful product like 1e. It's good to expand, but many people are going to stick with 1e...

You actually have your answer in your post, you just started Pathfinder 1, the designers have had to deal with that ruleset for over a decade, which was an evolution of a different company’s ruleset rather than something truly their own.

Also how successful, and continued success, is a question that also factored into them starting a new edition.

It's one thing to start something new, and quite another to abandon it altogether. 3.5/pathfinder etc have been popular for thirty years. It's popular for a reason.

Yes, it was popular for certain reasons, certain reasons that don’t exist anymore as DND 5e and Starfinder game out.