What brought you into Pathfinder?

[Tridus]

Got invited to a game by a GM that was running Rise of the Runelords anniversary edition. Stuck around because that was fun and I was already familiar with 3.5.

Switched to PF2 because it's just so much easier on the GM side to run, and the adventures serve as a pretty good base to run a campaign from. Also, you know, there's so much queer representation that I get to see myself in it. :D

[Oliver von Spreckelsen]

I was a fan of the magazines Dungeon and Dragon. When WotC cancelled the licenses and Paizo went with Pathfinder I switched and never looked back.

[Ritunn]

I was originally introduced to Paizo via Starfinder funnily enough, but had always known of Pathfinder since 2012 due to my Earthdawn 1e and D&D 4e gaming groups. I eventually transitioned to playing D&D 5e, but PF 1e was always this funny oddity with what I was told had, "Too much math and really weird character options."

Eventually, I heard PF 2e had released and my same friend who introduced me to Starfinder 1e began telling me about it as well, but I was mostly more interested in Starfinder at the moment. Then, of course, they told me the secret passphrase to get me interested in the system entirely "They just added kitsune". I grabbed and read through all the mainline releases out by then and then proceeded to enjoy my few pages of kitsune content. I quickly realized the system had everything I loved about Starfinder and what originally made me excited for TTRPGs I hadn't really experienced since those 4e days. If anything, Pathfinder 2e is what truly got me into the TTRPG space and checking out even more systems from other publishers.

In the end, I didn't even play a kitsune in my first PF2e campaign, I played a kobold! But I have played several kitsune since then.

[Hoatu]

I found it on my own after being introduced to PF1e at work. I’ve never really played TTRPGs before and thought D&D was a dumb waste of time. I also thought D&D was pretty generic and boring fantasy (without knowing that is where all modern fantasy games are based around). I only got into TTRPGs because my line of work at the time meant I ran out of things to do and the imagination of PF2e helped me get through it.

Anyway, there were three things that attracted me to PF2e:
•Modular character customization via feats, ancestries/heritages, skills, etc..
•Four spell traditions
•Three-action system

3-action system made for an intuitive to play (I always got confused on what’s standard/bonus/free/reaction/move actions). The four spell traditions made casters kinda more fun and deep. And the modular character creation is what I want from RPGs. I hate playing RPGs with no freedom of exploration or expression.

And you guys keep knocking it out of the park with new ancestries and class options. The respectful approach to culture and diversity really draws me in, especially when you (Paizo) have gone out of your way to accurately adapt not well-known cultures into fantasy. I’m really amazed when you did for Minata and some choices in the Character Guide!

Please keep doing that! I only hope PF2e continues to grow because it’s the only big TTRPG I know (in my limited experience) that allows me to play what I really want to play in the way I want to play it.

[kedrann]

I'm what some people would call a Grognard. Started playing in the 1980s and D&D with the red box, then went through all editions while also playing other games like Call of Cthulhu, Pendragon or Nephilim.

Like several commenters I read, I was disappointed by D&D 4e. Several good ideas, but the result was very much less so, so switched back to 35 and then to PF1e for two reasons. Mechanically, I considered it fixed many of 3.5's problems but the real clicker was Golarion and the related Adventure Paths.

I played and GM'ed for years in Mystara, loved the world and I consider Golarion its successor. I loved GM'ing and playing through several APs (my group had lots of fun with Skulls and Shackles and Jade Regent for example). I really appreciate the depth and thought given to the Lore books. The Travel Guide is a favorite of mine, helping me flesh out many aspects of play.

I switched eagerly to PF2e because I had seen the problems of 1e as a GM several times, for example when GM'ing Iron Gods. PF1e has a tendency to fall apart at high-level, while PF2e is a lot more stable.

Sure, it sacrificed some things to reach that, but I think it did it well and it also brought several things like the 3 actions that I can't see doing without now.

[JiCi]

D&D 4E...

P1E was "D&D 3.75E", which was easier to get into.

[Evan Tarlton]

I was a huge fan of Dungeon and Dragon, and then WotC pulled the plug. I checked out Paizo's new magazine, and fell in love.

[Set]

Big fan of 3.0 and the, IMO, even better 3.5, and had been reading and collecting Dragon since, uh, issue 70-something, and Dungeon since it launched, so I was eager to see what the minds behind the last several years worth of Dragon and Dungeon content would make of 3.X.

D&D 4e not being at all to my taste certainly cemented my initial love of Pathfinder 1e.

I was aware of some of the great ideas that Steve Kenson had included in his d20 modifications for Mutants & Masterminds, like degrees of success (and remember during PF1 beta there was talk about having some conditions be staged, like stinking cloud nauseating on a big success, but only sickening on a lesser success, or blindness causing the actual blinded condition on a strong success, but only dazzled on a lesser success, but that idea was too soon, I think, and got voted off the island, along with the idea of rogues and fighters being able to apply those conditions as well, not just wizards with spells), so it's kind of cool to see some variation on those old ideas have made it to Pathfinder 2 as well!

I did find it odd how many people were quick to launch on the 'fear of change!' label for those of us who avoided D&D 4e, considering, in my case, I transitioned from D&D 1st ed, to D&D 2nd ed, to D&D 3.0, to D&D 3.5 and generally found each and every new edition till then a marked improvement (with the 2nd to 3rd edition changes the most utterly transformative, in a good way!).

I remain a huge fan of the rich setting, and so many of the exciting and innovative and idea-inspiring nations and cultures that Paizo had developed for Golarion.

[Kilraq Starlight]

I played DnD initially (3.5 era), but never found a consistent game as a kid. When I was in the military one of my superiors ran a game and I got into character building then. Later, when both of us left the military, we meet again and he ran pathfinder instead of 3.5 or 4DnD. I liked the open source information and the ability to find information freely. I played that well into 2019, when I heard about the PF2E playtest. As a caster favoring player, I did not like the initial taste of PF2E, but Nonnat1 videos eventually got me to give it a second look. Between that and the Archives, I got sold. I've been running a school club for my students since then. Fun times.

[Maya Coleman]

This thread has been a really fun read. It's great to see what got you all inspired! Thank you to everyone for helping Alex with this. Please, keep them coming!

[DMurnett]

I (for the sake of simplicity) got into RPGs with D&D 5e, and rapidly ended up as a forever DM. I've known of Pathfinder for a while, the dndmemes subreddit is full of "missionaries" (I salute them for their work), but when I was really starting to burn out on running 5e I saw that there was a humble bundle for all the (legacy) PF2e core books, which I decided to pick up. Reading through the CRB I knew basically instantly that the system was for me and running the Beginner Box for my group to great success only further solidified this.

[ottdmk]

Our forever GM wanted to try 2nd Edition, so we agreed... and ported over our party of L12 D&D 3.5 to Pathfinder 2e.

We enjoyed it, so we decided to stick with it. Then I decided to try out Pathfinder Society 2e play.

Pathfinder has been my main hobby ever since.

[Plane]

kedrann wrote:

Started playing in the 1980s and D&D with the red box, then went through all editions while also playing other games like Call of Cthulhu...

Ditto. We were up to 3.5 heeavily modified in a Mystara campaign when one of our teen players mentioned one day that he was playing Pathfinder, and it was awesome. Ok. So I checked it out and was really impressed. We converted and switched for the rest of the campaign. Everyone was happy.

4.0 came out. I read it. I read it twice. Nope. If I want to play WoW, I wouldn't do it on tabletop.

I was so impressed with Paizo and P1, that I committed to P2 for the playtest and beyond. It is the most elegant version of D20 I have ever seen, yet if you had shown it to me in the early 80s, I would have recognized it as the same game I loved. It's such a win to have it. I can see myself playing it for a long time.

[Lucas Yew]

Main Topic

1. First TTRPG was 4.5E (= Essentials), picked up on a family trip to Honolulu.
2. Learned about the (then deemed safe) OGL and the "rules as physics" natured 3.5E, which rang a big bell in my soul. Almost there...
3. A jarring case of PC-NPC Asymmtry observed in an 4.5E adventure made me snap. Still can't forgive it...
4. Not long after the above, learned that PF1 was a thing, the rest being history.

----

Addendum

5. Steadily got disturbed by the Linear Fighters Quadratic Wizards syndrome. Investment of same XP values resulting in blatant unfairness in snagging screen time and in-game world influence still seems so WRONG.
6. The Spheres books quenched the immediate thirst for balance, but it is a 3rd party book so it wasn't perfect feeling.
7. PF2 happened, then PF2R post-fiasco. While the new system half gave up on symmetric NPCs just like the 5E engine, it was still more detailed compared to the latter; and finally a working balance rightfully based on class performance ceiling. So I'm still sticking around, despite the simulationist itch.

[Master Han Del of the Web]

I came into gaming proper in the latter half of D&D 4e's lifespan and the group that adopted me were already confirmed Pathfinder players at the time so I was brought into a pocket of Pathfinder already. I stuck with the game over the years with brief exposures to D&D 5e being profoundly underwhelming. There was none of the customization in 5e that PF1e had and what options were there I found distinctly bland.

Fortunately, Paizo seemed to grow with me outside of a few worrying periods (I always like to remind people that there were reasons Paizo's staff unionized). I was an early adopter of Starfinder 1e, really enjoying the design direction of the system and the new opportunities for storytelling. Dead Suns was the first campaign I ran a party through to completion... and I ended up becoming my group's forever GM because of that.

I was a little late in adopting Pathfinder 2e but I've grown to really appreciate the new design paradigm and where it clearly built off the groundwork laid by Starfinder. With Starfinder 2e on the horizon, I'm only more excited to see where the games go next.

[udonge_max]

Magus sparked my interest and what made me even more interested was the absolute depth of character customization. That, the elegance of the 3-action system, the breadth of GM tools, and the vibes of Paizo & the community has kept my interest.

[MrCharisma]

I played DnD back in the day (last played 3.5), then moved over to PF1E. The group I play in has a regular game, but we often try new systems when they come out just to see what we like. We tried PF2E and eventually swapped over to it by starting a new campaign (Our main campaign is QftFF, but on the off-weeks we're finishing book 6 of Iron Gods in PF1E).

The defining factor that led us to swap to PF2E as our main system was the ease of using it as a GM. We all take turns ag GMing, but no matter what system you run the GM is the one who does the most work, and has to do the most prep for each session. As such the rule is basically "If you want to run a particular system then you have to be ready to GM it." While we're fairly democratic in what kinds of games we play (both in terms of the system we're using and the kind of role-play or the theme of the adventure), at the end of the day we can only play something if someone is willing to run it. If someone wants to run an AP in a particular system then that's what we tend to play.

PF2E is a good system for GMs, you can run single-enemy encounters, you can re-balance fairly easily, there usually aren't as many complex abilities as something like PF1E. Generally the math keeps everything in check so you don't have to re-balance encounters just because you have a Gunslinger or a God-Wizard or a Bloodrager with a +59 to grapple.

Personally I prefer playing PF1E, but if I want to play it I have to be willing to run it. I've learned to enjoy PF2E, it's still fun to roleplay and I've found a few classes and builds that I find more exciting (my Reflection-heritage Mirror-Thaumaturge is one of my favourite character concepts ever in any system). I generally think any game can be fun if you fit with the group, but sometimes it can be a bit difficult to find the fun in a particular system. It took me a little while, but even when I "wasn't enjoying PF2E" I was still having fun roleplaying with my friends, and through that I've found aspects of this system that I really do enjoy. Also as a maths nerd I really do appreciate the +10/-10 crit system for how much extra depth it gives.

[Angwa]

Our local tabletop community was never exclusively D&D, but it was always a system that was played, fading in an out of popularity.

PF1 however never really caught on as by that time everyone was burned out on 3.5 and PF was seen as not fixing the underlying issues.

4e did not catch on at release, but after the edition matured, and especially the MM3 monster math fixes, D&D was back on the menu with a vengeance.

After 4e 5e was tested but dropped very quickly, there were still some forays into D20 territory like 13th Age and Beyond the Wall, but nothing which spawned multiple long-term campaigns like 4e.

Until PF2e was introduced. Its selling points to the groups I play with:

1) fun character customization
2) balanced enough so the GM doesn't have to worry about the above
3) easy enough to GM
4) combat is fun
5) keeps working at all levels

So, yes, like many others, also playing PF2e because of 4e. But unlike many others, specifically because we liked 4e ;-)

[Glenn Magus Harvey]

Some high school friends had some D&D 3e sourcebooks and I started making a character. Never played it.

Then in college one day I started chatting with a new friend who turned out to be into D&D and we got together a group that he GM'd. I actually made and played my first character at his table. We played D&D 3.5e.

I later heard about a thing called Pathfinder, which was basically D&D 3.5e, but better. I checked it out, and indeed, it was 3.5e but better. I started playing that, with some other groups of friends, as I'd graduated by then.

I heard about D&D 4e but basically ignored it, partly because I heard it was quite different from D&D 3.5e and was more combat-focused rather than simulation-focused. But probably a bigger reason is that I gradually learned about how Pathfinder and D&D differ in their licensing -- Pathfinder rule materials are legally freely out there for anyone to use, so the information was easily accessible on the web (in addition to, and perhaps more conveniently than, the PF1e books I picked up), whereas all that stuff from D&D splatbooks was not legally accessible. This commitment to open gaming practices made me like Pathfinder more.

Later I'd also heard about Pathfinder 2e. Started reading up on all the neat changes, and got interested in playing it. Eventually GM'd the Beginner Box adventure for some friends online.

I also heard about D&D 5e. I'd heard some good things about it, and was poking into it a bit. I never really got into D&D 5e yet -- I should mention that I'm primarily a videogamer rather than a tabletop gamer (and primarily a retro videogamer with tastes for older console games), so TTRPGs aren't the biggest thing in my life.

But then the OGL update fiasco happened, and I was like, yeah, PF2e seems like a much better bet than D&D 5e (or whatever they're doing now, D&D 5.5e?). Paizo has maintained its commitment to open gaming as before. I watched the PF2e Remaster unfold and it was really neat.

I decided to jump into Pathfinder Society (2nd edition). Trying to use Remaster stuff when possible, to get a more proper feel for it. Recently made a character and I've played two scenarios so far.

Ironically, the Remaster means that the big pre-Remaster PF2e Humble Bundle (as well as the PF1e Humble Bundle) that I bought a while back is somewhat useless. But whatever, lol. (I can still make an Eldritch Trickster!)

Another irony is that, despite Pathfinder's open gaming stuff being all free and accessible, I've actually bought Pathfinder stuff, while I've just never bought anything from D&D (my GM had all the books we needed and I haven't played it since). And I'm happier with supporting Paizo, too.

The only trouble I'm having is when my memories of D&D 3.5e and PF1e confuse me about PF2e mechanics, lol. I'm used to intuiting things like "what about touch AC?" or expecting a bunch of attacks of opportunity, haha.

Sidenote: That friend in college who GM'd my first TTRPG experience -- he went on to work at Paizo and do some really neat stuff.

[dirkdragonslayer]

I was a wargamer, primarily Infinity, and the 3 action system and lore was really appealing to me. I wanted to find an RPG group but couldn't for 3-4 months, so I said "screw it, I'll be the GM." I put my notification out on a local discord channel.

It turns out if you offer to GM, people come out of the woodwork en masse. The eternal struggle with TTRPGs, lots of people want to play, but not many want to be the GM.

[Powers128]

I don't recall exactly when I picked up the p2e playtest but coming from 5e, I was enamored by the robustness of the system and how much better character building was. Never looked back since. P2e remains as the best ttrpg on the market imo

[Ace_Starfire]

The OGL scandal, as well as other slimy activity of WoTC.

[Nelzy]

Combination of:
1. Wanting to test the 3 action system
2. The memories of Pf1E and dnd 3.5
3. but most importantly it was how stagnant and unfun dnd 5e had become with its limited character progress both in character levels and items
(we started to drift more and more away from 5e testing alot of other systems, Call of cuthulu, wampire and more, but so far pf2 is my personal favorite.)

[Lord Cozy]

For me it was the Owlcat games. For various reasons I never played a DnD-based game (like Baldur's Gate) so my first introduction with the ttrpg scene was through those games.

I'm still exploring both Pathfinder and DnD as High Fantasy systems (even though I'm more biased towards the former due to aforementioned reasons - as well as mechanical ones) and, even company-wise, I prefer Paizo to WOTC. Partly due to the latter's disrespect towards its own creator (and "grandpa" of the hobby) Gary Gygax, trying to appeal to that mythic "modern audience" by erasing/tampering with his legacy. Also the predatory financial policies, OGL fiasco, etc.
Idk, I get annoyed with marketing stuff like that.

As for editions, I like 1e a lot and currently learning the mechanics of 2e as well. Plus the lore and whatever changes, retcons occured and stuff like that.

Sadly, in my home country DnD is by far the more famous of the two, so I'll have to struggle a lot more to find a table.

[Ruzza]

I live overseas where Pathfinder and most roleplaying games are quite hard to come by. I was essentially living in a little bubble and dreamed of times gone by with TTRPGs, never wanting to try and teach PF1e to a new group of players (in a foreign language no less). By sheer coincidence I happened to take a trip back to America when the PF2e playtest was starting and happened to pick up a physical copy to peruse - y'know casually.

I fell in love with a system that gave me a lot of the character building options of PF1, but mechanics that encouraged the use of the full suite of tools at your disposal. In PF1, I could make some gimmicky characters around forgotten bits of rules, but PF2 felt like everything in the toolkit was viable and encouraged. It was exactly what I'd been looking for from PF1 (and often tried to force in - "Come on, guys. My character is SO good at Aiding, it's a good build!")

I've now been running PF2 since the playtest and truly love what the system has done.