Pathfinder 1E Is Pathfinder D & D?

[HalfordAskold]

Ok, now before people start jumping up and down; I love Dungeons and Dragons. I am way old school (started in 1977). I was so glad to have found Pathfinder, as I couldn't play 4th Ed. Now, back to my question.

I have played every incarnation of D & D there is. And though my fellow local gamers jokingly call Pathfinder 'D & D 3.8', is it really? The feel isn't there imo. And no, thats not a bad thing, its just different. Before there were dungeon crawls, there was Gygax, etc. I don't know. And now with Pathfinder, which I love, its different. Maybe its like going from one D & D world house game to another.

I tried to explain to a fellow old school gamer who had just glanced at Pathfinder: its like if I Love Lucy comes on TV. I remember a lot of the older shows and loved them. Now I look back, and still love what I see, but compared to today's show, there is definitely a difference.

So I'm asking: is Pathfinder D & D? Or a real close copy. Or something else?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

No, it is not.

But, for nearly all practical purposes, it is.

 

[darjr]

I'm using it to play D&D.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Yes, in all but name.

 

[Ebony Dragon]

I think this depends on your view about whether or not 3.0/3.5 was real D&D. Pathfinder to me does feel like a natural continuation of the 3.0->3.5 system.

 

[HalfordAskold]

I think this depends on your view about whether or not 3.0/3.5 was real D&D. Pathfinder to me does feel like a natural continuation of the 3.0->3.5 system.

I too think its a continuation. Well said!

 

[billd91]

Officially, it is not. Paizo doesn't own that trademark.

But, really, it is. And a damn fine version of it too.

 

[JDragon]

I think this depends on your view about whether or not 3.0/3.5 was real D&D. Pathfinder to me does feel like a natural continuation of the 3.0->3.5 system.

Gotta third this thought, its what I was thinking when I read the OP.

For me it is my D&D, and for anyone that I talk to that is not a gamer I still call it D&D.

JD

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I would argue that D&D has been so influential that there are a number of games that are D&D, even if they don't have the brand name affixed to them.

They feature hit points, armor class, level-based advancement, character classes, standard (and sometimes not-so-standard) fantasy races, a focus on magic and swords over psionics and gunpowder (although those sometimes exist, too) and a professional class that sacks ruins, kills the inhabitants and loots the bodies.

Is Pathfinder D&D? Absolutely. So is Castles & Crusades, all of the OSR games I'm familiar with, and more. (And 4E is D&D, too, trademark or no, for that matter.)

After a certain point, the influence of a property is so pervasive that it escapes its owners. Dungeons & Dragons passed that point long ago and the OGL means that it'll never only belong to the trademark-holders ever again -- they get to control the name, and arguably a few monsters, and that's all.

 

[Crothian]

No, it isn't. And that's not a bad thing; it is a good thing. It's Pathfinder, it is its own game even though it was built off of a version of D&D. It is much better for it to be its own game then considered just another version of an old classic.