Comparing Pathfinder and 4th Edition for 5Next

[ren1999]

Here are my findings.

4th Edition eliminates a lot of redundancies in the rolling system. I did learn the DC and saving throw system of Pathfinder but spell casters should roll their own. DM's should not have to roll saves for all monsters. That creates a lot of work. 4th Edition solves this issue by making spells Intelligence/Wisdom/Charisma versus Defense.

Pathfinder Problems
Touch, Flatfooted.. no.
Damage Reduction with Resistances.. redundant.

4th Edition Problems
The monster hit points are just too high. Pathfinder is much better about appropriate hit points and their modules are written better.

Though Pathfinder's rolling system is needlessly complex, Pathfinder's variety of spells is perfect and true to the original D&D game -- much better than 4th edition's redundant and seemingly random spell and prayer powers.

However, I continually want to rewrite all the spells and prayers into an even less redundant and useless set than what Pathfinder has. Every spell should be a hard decision for a caster to pass up.

If you really want to know why Pathfinder is outselling 4th Edition, play both systems and compare them. I think the main reason is that the modules are designed really well. "Curse of the Everflame" is awesome. 4th edition needs such a module to teach its system.

 

[Hussar]

IBTL

I will agree totally with your last point. Paizo's strength is certainly in its adventures. Fantastic work, colorful, original, and just all around good.

WOTC's is playing catchup with the last couple of issues of Dungeon, but, wow, are they really sucking hind mammary here.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I have no doubt that the much-touted PF adventures are the market standards.

I also have no doubt that the average D&D/PF player has never seen one.

They're certainly significant, but it would be short-sighted to write off an event as momentous as D&D being unseated by a game with a different (and unrecognizable) brand name to something as tangential to the gaming experience as a published adventures and settings.

 

[mkill]

4th Edition eliminates a lot of redundancies in the rolling system. I did learn the DC and saving throw system of Pathfinder but spell casters should roll their own. DM's should not have to roll saves for all monsters. That creates a lot of work. 4th Edition solves this issue by making spells Intelligence/Wisdom/Charisma versus Defense.

Meh. The true solution to this is Players Roll All the Dice.
It's a D20 option, but neither PF nor 4E use it.

Pathfinder Problems
Touch, Flatfooted.. no.

Touch and Flatfooted AC aren't bad as such. They simulate "attacks that bypass armor" and "being unable to dodge". As concepts, they are fine.
The problem is rather that spellcasters can use either to get easy hits, while Fighters etc. usually can't. Also, touch AC really screws armored types over.

Damage Reduction with Resistances.. redundant.

Huh?

4th Edition Problems
The monster hit points are just too high. Pathfinder is much better about appropriate hit points and their modules are written better.

Totally depends on A, B, C, D and E, but I don't want to waste too much thread space to explain A, B, C, D and E here. Has been discussed to death.

Though Pathfinder's rolling system is needlessly complex, Pathfinder's variety of spells is perfect and true to the original D&D game -- much better than 4th edition's redundant and seemingly random spell and prayer powers.

PF is based on 3.5. Monte hated what 3.5 did to spells. 3.5 is based on 3.0. Gary Gygax hated 3.0 and what it did to spells. Just saying.

And that's before we get to whether "perfect and true to the original D&D game" is even desirable.

However, I continually want to rewrite all the spells and prayers into an even less redundant and useless set than what Pathfinder has. Every spell should be a hard decision for a caster to pass up.

This goal is incompatible with "perfect and true to the original D&D game". Just saying.

If you really want to know why Pathfinder is outselling 4th Edition, play both systems and compare them. I think the main reason is that the modules are designed really well. "Curse of the Everflame" is awesome. 4th edition needs such a module to teach its system.

I agree that Pathfinder's strength is adventure modules.
I have not seen convincing figures on which system sells more. All we have are isolated accounts of "system X sells more in my game shop". Sure, it's possible that PF outsells 4E, but don't treat it as fact.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Both systems have relative advantages and disadvantages. I think the challenge is that not everyone agrees on which elements fall into which category!

 

[Janaxstrus]

I agree that Pathfinder's strength is adventure modules.
I have not seen convincing figures on which system sells more. All we have are isolated accounts of "system X sells more in my game shop". Sure, it's possible that PF outsells 4E, but don't treat it as fact.

"According to ICV2 Wizards of the Coast is no longer the best selling RPG. Pathfinder is. ICV2 are a specialist firm of consultants who track the comic book, anime, games and collectible markets. Their sales charts have some authority"

Pathfinder outsells Dungeons and Dragons

Pathfinder modules are indeed top notch. It is one thing that WotC needs to focus on if they want to make 5e a success. I can't remember the last module produced by Wizards that made me say "Wow!". Almost all of the PF stuff I have played has done so. I've been running one group through Sins of the Seven Swords, and preparing to possibly embark on the Pharoah modules, while also playing in a campaign based in Korvosa, running through the Blood Veil (can't remember the name) adventure path. Both are highly recommended.


The PF world of Golarion is also very very good, so much better than Eberron, in my personal opinion.

The differences between the 2 systems are obvious. One is based on 3.5 with some good and some terrible changes, while the other is 4e which has it's own merits and drawbacks compared to 3.5/PF

 

[GreyICE]

IBTL

I will agree totally with your last point. Paizo's strength is certainly in its adventures. Fantastic work, colorful, original, and just all around good.

WOTC's is playing catchup with the last couple of issues of Dungeon, but, wow, are they really sucking hind mammary here.

Going to agree with this. Pathfinder isn't really my thing, but WotC missed any opportunity to do adventure paths. Most modules are drop in, drop out, that don't give you any real connection to a larger, coherent campaign.

 

[groklynn]

WotC made a huge mistake when they had released a "truly innovative" and casual and "gamist" 4e. And after that they've made an additional stupid thing - they've decided to abandon the traditional d&d worlds. I mean, they've abandoned traditional worlds in terms of classic feel. They put tieflings and dragonborn instead of gnomes in PHB, they kill "u-know-who" just to rebuild magic and power system and so on. And, finally, they've made the third bad thing, and I think it is still the worst one. They've stop OGL for 4e and as a result - they've lost "a pool of ideas" and free/additional tools. There were tons of d20 compatible stuff and you could easily integrate it with D&D, or at least there was an illusion of it. And Paizo did the right move, they've decided, like "why do we need to change anything? don't fix it if it ain't broke" and that's why it works.
Does the 4e suck like a complete D&D game? Maybe. Does the 4e have a good "engine" inside? Yes, sir. It is the one of the best systems to start with if you are new to role-playing. Especially the 4e essentials.
So 4e need to be reworked, D&D spirit should return to it's name and the dices should be thrown once again

 

[GreyICE]

OTOH Paizo fanboys are one of the most annoying things in the known universe, and have personally made me swear never to give Paizo a dime just to spite them.

 

[Tallifer]

I have begun playing Pathfinder since so few will play the Fourth Edition where I live these days.

I began roleplaying with AD&D in the early 1980s. However after such a long time, I had forgotten how annoying and unbalanced the whole early D&D thing is.

A wizard can end an encounter with Sleep or Charm Person at first level. But he then has little to do. A cleric has to waste his standard actions healing. Only a cleric can heal, but no one wants to play a cleric in many groups.

The Fourth Edition also has problems, although not the ones about which Pathfinder players complain. There are numerous broken combinations in both Pathfinder (Alchemist and Gunslinger) and the Fourth Edition (optimized strikers and chargers).

I hope that the Fifth Edition will nerf all the broken stuff.