D&D 4E 4e vs. Paizo: Mommy, Daddy, please stop fighting!

Ok, and I'm prefacing this by saying I don't think the companies have been at all opposed to one another (at least publicly) but that I've observed what I imagine to be a healthy level of venom mostly among certain fans of either edition.


The reason I'm starting this thread is that I found I'm caught in a really difficult spot and I want to express it:

I love the 4e rules, but the Pathfinder campaign setting is one of the best sourcebooks I've read.

Really, it's awkward for me. I worry that I'll get flamed, but I have to say it: I love the work that's coming out of both companies right now. I feel like I'm a part of a silent minority, but I've discovered that I'm really enjoying what both sides are coming up with.

As a DM I can't fathom running a 3.x campaign, certainly not straight out of any one book. 4th Edition is the best game to run for me, as it's relatively simple to come up with encounters and stories that I enjoy. Moreover, the R&D has come out with every class (except psionics and necromancers) that I need for running old school D&D adventures that I enjoy. Monster design means I can whip up a lot of unique solo or elite monsters of a particular role, and just say "yeah, that's Halaster Blackcloak" and Bam, I'm done.
Even the setting information is great fun, and of the pile of books I've grabbed, I'm happy to say there hasn't been a flop yet.

However, while I don't like the rules set for 3.x, I am so glad that Paizo still exists. My subscription to Dragon and Dungeon magazines was just in time to roll over into Pathfinder. I had a financial scaling back, and hadn't planned to run a 3.x game since 4e came out; I didn't renew, though I did buy several of their other books for a good read. Part of that was that the rules seemed like beating a dead horse, despite a genuine enthusiasm about the material that was coming out.
Then I picked up the Pathfinder Campaign setting. Just recently, this week. Virtually no rules, mostly flavour and crunchy setting info. I'm really blown away, and experiencing a real frustration that this is the campaign setting I would love to play in, but not the rules set. I'm going to work the money to be able to buy up all the other setting books, I think, and some of the modules. Having bought a number of the other AP books, I've decided that Paizo really has a powerhouse of incredibly talented people out there.

In effect, WOTC got the rules I need (for learning style and gaming group), while Paizo got the flavour and setting.

My dilemma: is it ethical to hope both sides continue their competition for the hearts and minds of the gaming community, simply because so much amazing material has come out of this?
I feel like a kid whose parents got divorced, but is getting piles of gifts from both sides; however, I have to leave one set at one parent's house, the other at the other's.

Why not just run a 4E game using Paizo's setting books (if you're not already)?

Don't feel bad about it at all! Surely there is big enough room in the RPG world for both companies?

fireinthedust said:

My dilemma: is it ethical to hope both sides continue their competition for the hearts and minds of the gaming community, simply because so much amazing material has come out of this?

Click to expand...

Yes. Count me as a 4e fan that hopes Paizo does fantastic with their products. They've certainly earned it.

In fact, I think, even if you don't plan on playing Paizo's 3.5, as a 4e fan, you should consider picking up the core rule book. I know it isn't their bread and butter, but I hope that it's a big enough splash to further competition.

Imagine, two top tier RPG companies that can afford to hire several full time game designers.

Competition is good for consumers, whether it be parental affection or role playing games.

Given the circumstances, I think we have a White Wolf type of situation, where one brand initially starts off very close to another (WW got it's start publishing a D&D newsletter) and gradually drifts away.

So yes, it's ethical to hope both companies do well because ultimately the triumph of one (if such a thing could be achieved) does not entail the demise of another.

I have the same kind of problem.

I like 4E. It is by far my favorite game to play right now. I loved 3.5E, and I particularly loved what Paizo did with it.

For Pathfinder, I like the setting (even if it is a bit too much of a kitchen sink setting for my tastes) and there are so many ideas, monster ecologies, and reworkings of 3.5 assumptions that I like. The art is fantastic, and in general more consistent than WotC's for 4E. Take a look at the illustration for the captain of the sunset ship in "The Jackal's Price" for evidence. Speaking of which, the most recent adventure path is great.

But that is where my love for it ends. I just don't want to play 3.5 anymore. I wish Paizo would produce 4.0 material, but that won't happen. Conversions are a poor suggestion - the design of the encounters in each game is just too different to make this easy, so some of my favorite Pathfinder adventures would be, at best, inspirations for my recreations of them into 4E adventures.

As much as I love the rules for 4E, and the gameplay, the setting details leave me cold. The art is improving; I wasn't a big fan of much of the art of the first core books. If I could combine Pathfinder setting with 4E rules, I would be very happy. I suppose that makes the Pathfinder Campaign Setting a pretty good product, given its lack of rules text.

Divorce is never good for the kids.

My fondest wish would be for WotC to negotiate some sort of special deal with Paizo to produce 4E adventure paths with full-on cooperation rather than have them need to use the GSL. I don't think this will happen, but I can dream.

My memo to WotC: guys, you make some great rules, really you do. When it comes to adventures, it's just not working out for me. I picked up Keep on the Shadowfell and Thunderspire, but I haven't bought anything since then because Pyramid of Shadows and the rest just haven't been that good. If you want to sell adventures, go through the folks who do it best. Seriously.

Imagine a similar memo in reverse directed at Paizo, who have some fantastic adventures, but rules materials? Not so much.

There are two great tastes here, that would taste great together...if only they could take that step!

Just my $.02...no offense intended to those who love WotC adventures or Paizo's rules...

--Steve

Some guy going under the name "Scott Betts" on the Paizo message boards has been doing an unofficial 4E translation of the Rise of the Runelords book "Burnt Offerings". Most of his posts are in the 4th ed D&D section of the Paizo message boards.

So far Betts seems to have done a good job, judging from my DM's dry run of Betts' 4E translation documents in our once-a-month 4E game based on the "burnt offerings" book.

Yeah.

My home game is already shaping up to be a lot like Pathfinder in that I'm trying to broaden the spectrum of human civilizations. I really like the cultures. Also the races, especially the gnomes' Bleaching, works well with the 4e gnomes.
Basically, I'm stealing all the stuff I can from other settings. Varisians and Harrow I'm going to steal wholesale. My problem is with every new book I want to let the Players make up new characters! We're still using the ones from 4e Core. One player is creative but disorganized, so she'd waffle between her half-elf feylock and, like, a gnome druid of some sort. heh.
Another issue I have is that a lot of the cool ideas I already have in place are starting to appear in Pathfinder books.
I can see why it's a kitchen sink. I wonder if the designers are going to get to a point where they start using the "logic" they've set out: trapsing through familiar places, or cities, etc.

4e Conversion: Iiiiiinteresting. I'd like to check that out.

I took a peek at an MM2 today, as they arrived at a local store. amazing stuff.

SteveC said:

My fondest wish would be for WotC to negotiate some sort of special deal with Paizo to produce 4E adventure paths with full-on cooperation rather than have them need to use the GSL. I don't think this will happen, but I can dream.

Click to expand...

I think that ship has sailed. I'd be surprised if Paizo does anything for 4e in the near future. Not saying they won't eventually, but I'm sure their best stuff will be slated for Pathfinder. (Which makes me happy.)

I've said it before and I still believe it to be true. The lack of a really exciting, complete and well done setting that was designed from the ground up to support and showcase 4E, has been one of WotC's biggest mistakes when they launched the new system. Many people are either unable or unwilling to create a detailed setting on their own, and they look to published worlds as a way to reduce prep time while gaining inspiration. I know FR 4E is enjoyed by many gamers, but for me (and many others) WotC broke too much of the setting in order to fit it into the 4E mold, and now I want nothing to do with it.

But without a kick-ass setting to help attract players, I think 4E's draw is primarily based on system-crunch. It will be interesting to see if Eberron 4E has a similar welcome to what we saw when FR was released. (ie very strongly mixed)

On the other hand, Paizo has been promoting its use of the older 3.5 and has been successful largely because of its outstanding fluff and Adventure Paths. But many gamers are no longer enamored with 3.5, so it will be interesting to see if the revised crunch of the Pathfinder RPG really does breathe new life (and compatibility) into that older system.

All that to say I agree with PoeticJustice. Competition is good, and we are enjoying the fruits of their battle for our gaming $. And as MichaelSomething said ... use them both and don't feel bad about it. Its your game so play it in whichever way works best for you and your players.