• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 4E What was Paizo thinking? 3.75 the 4E clone?

Yes they have preorders already let me give you the full list

1. Pathfinder #7—Curse of the Crimson Throne Chapter 1: "Edge of Anarchy" (OGL
2. Pathfinder Chronicles: Guide to Korvosa (OGL)
3. Pathfinder Chronicles: Harrow Deck
4. GameMastery Module J3: Crucible of Chaos (OGL)
5. Pathfinder Chronicles: Rise of the Runelords Map Folio
6. Pathfinder Companion: Second Darkness (OGL)
7. Pathfinder #6—Rise of the Runelords Chapter 6: "Spires of Xin-Shalast" (OGL)
8. Pathfinder Roleplaying Game (OGL) Print Edition Hardcover
9. Pathfinder Roleplaying Game (OGL) Beta Release Print Edition
10. GameMastery Module TC1: Into the Haunted Forest (OGL)

Now this is just pathfinder and gamemastery products but there ya go they have enuff preorders to knock some of there in print stuff off the top 10 list.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

AZRogue

First Post
3E killed my DnD game.

When 3E first came out I was overjoyed and posted happily all over Eric's original board. So many of the things they were doing sounded fantastic. 3E was, quite honestly, an amazing step forward for DnD. I still believe that. It was light years ahead, in terms of design, of 2E (though I loved Player's Options).

The problem was that, in practice, all of those awesome cool pieces, when put together, became more and more cumbersome as the characters increased in level. Also the ENTIRE wealth-by-level thing was a very hated and loathed feature at my table. The game bogged down and became ... tedious. The Full Attack option, once a character got around 3 attacks, was where it began. It then just got worse with Buffs. "Does my Natural Armor stack with my Deflection bonus? Does that change my Flat-Footed AC, or my Touch? Oh, and this round I'm going to get Luck, Divine, and .... let me see .... a Dodge bonus to add to my Inherent and Enhancement bonuses. What's my Flat-Footed AC now?" Add in Summoned monsters and balancing creatures with their own stacking buffs and round to round combat just became boring. So much so that I dreaded making up the next adventure and the co-DM of the group just flat out refused to run the system. People didn't even want to update their character sheets after a game. They wanted to play, not be book keepers.

And so we just left the system behind and played D20 Modern which was a beautiful system to run sometimes, and Rolemaster/MERP where we could get all the "complicated" we wanted but at least be able to sever limbs for our trouble.

3E did a lot, a LOT, of things right. The simplified mechanic of d20 roll + modifiers vs. a DC. Templates. The unification of the Spell Lists. Skills (though I had to give everyone a blanket 4 skill points extra to get into the ball park of where they should have been). Feats. All of those things were amazing. They were the things I read about that got me excited about the game when I had been convinced that 1E and Player's Options would be the only DnD I ever played. They were the reason why I gave 3E a shot.

But in execution they didn't work out as well as they could have. Why? Because as the game progressed it took nearly as long to prepare or manage things OUTSIDE the game as it did IN. When my group and I get together we get together to play. The characters each have their goals, and their plots, and they have the mysteries I give them that they're trying to unravel and they want to get into some rough scrapes and spill a little blood on the ground. They're completely not interested in keeping track of how many bonuses they have and whether they're stacking them correctly, or of calculating all the cascading effects that changing that one magical item at the end of the game had on their character. Sure, it made more sense the way things were set up, but in the process turned our favorite game into a chore. I mean, the players would PAY the rules-lawyer of the group to update their character sheets when needed.

Does 4E sound perfect? Hell no. But it sounds like they're making sure that the game is going to have more "play" and less worrying about the trivial. In creative writing the author is advised to "not write the boring parts" and I hope that 4E follows that advise.

Of course, those boring parts are the reason why some people play. Hell, I met two guys once who wanted to join our group and asked if it was "all right" if they "role played" their characters when they weren't at a game. It took me a few minutes to get that they didn't want bonus experience points but just wanted to role play their characters going about their day and thought they should have the DM's permission or something. I let them know that they should probably find another group. No harm, no foul, tastes just differ.

Hopefully 4E can do what it claims: bring a fun, fast-paced game back to the table that allows us to insert some roleplaying where the book keeping used to be. And hopefully Pathfinder delivers the more involved, nuts and bolts, keep track of everything style that fans of 3E love. I'm just happy that I'll be able to kick in a door again and take someone's stuff without having to look up the synergy bonus that brass fittings give to a wooden door's Hardness rating.
 


Raven Crowking said:
Again, this differs from TSR how?
Reading one of the links provided to insights from Ryan Dancey (?), the difference seems to be that TSR (eventually) looked at the cons of as a shore, and WotC seems to see it more like an opportunity.

If you were refering to the feedback cards - Ryan Dancey noticed that he could not find any traces of customer feedback archived by TSR. Either it never existed, or it was destroyed before WotC got there, but it seems as if they weren't high on their priority list.


I also remember comments from Monte Cook that he was astounded that there were a lot of designers around that never or no longer bothered to play (but he might not have been referring to TSR, at least not specifically). Which wasn't true for WotC when he was there, and isn't true today, either (unless all the blog posts to the contrary are fake ;) ). (And luckily, it is also not true for Paizo.)
 

Keoki

First Post
Raven Crowking said:
Yes WotC is, but on what basis is it making that claim? So far as I can tell from what has been released so far, 4e is no different than any other edition of D&D in one respect: it sacrifices some strengths of previous editions to compensate for those edition's weaknesses, in some cases failing to compensate adequately, in some cases succeeding spectacularly, and in some cases creating new, unforeseen, weaknesses.

Of course, I don't buy that older versions of D&D carry stigma.

It may be a little hard for anyone that frequents these boards to approach D&D as if it were a new game to them, without at least a little myopia. But when newer versions of anything are available, people are less likely to buy old products unless they have some sort of attachment to them, unless there's a serious problem with the new product. Think of it this way: if some company made a new type of phone that was supposed to be better and more reliable for the same price as an old phone, and the majority of phone-users were converting to the new phones, which kind of phone would you be most likely to buy, honestly? With no attachment to either version, there would be no reason to go with the old, especially if there aren't many people you could call (this part of the analogy represents the probable relative difficulty of finding Pathfinder players as opposed to 4E players). Of course, if the new phone were rubbish, you might buy an old one and hope the rest of the world, or at least the folks you're interested in calling, realize this too and go back to the old phones. Otherwise, however, I think it's almost certain that a first-time phone buyer would go for the new-and-improved with go-faster stripes.
 
Last edited:

Vradna

First Post
Shadewyn said:
4) You instead choose to build your own NON COMPATIBLE version of D&D. Does not meant the solutions were better or worse that WotC's to the 3.5 issues. Thats why several folks were detailing how the upgrade to Pathfinder is not going to allow or encourage you to still use your heritage 3.5 material. The 3.75 Paizo stuff powercreeps and shifts the gameplay focus in such a way that it is a whole new game (the same way 4E does when it apporached the design problems of 3.5)

5) You now took your target market of 3.5E players and broke that peice into "those who will upgrade to Pathfinder" and "those who keep the core 3.5".

==========

Thats why I say it is a bonehead move.

Wow. Very stong words even in the edited post. Jason Bulmahn informed everyone it was the first rough draft (I disklike the term 'alpha release' but anyway...). Jason also asked everyone to experiment by incorporating some of the rules into existing 3.5 campaigns and to give Paizo some feedback.

So you've tested all the rules and found them completely incompatible with your existing 3.5 campaign? Wow again: On the insistence of three of my players, I have replaced the rogue class in my Savage Tide campaign and that seems to be working okay, so I am slowly picking through bits and pieces in the PDF for the next session.

I think that I am going to be a Bonehead with the other Boneheads at Paizo for now.
 

Maggan

Writer for CY_BORG, Forbidden Lands and Dragonbane
Aaron L said:
I'm glad someone said it, or I was going to; everyone keeps blathering on about "market research" and " gamer feedback" when I have seen absolutely NO sins of any kind of survey or concerted effort at gathering feedback since 3E was being compiled.

I have filled in at least three online surveys on the WotC website, so there have been surveys. Maybe you missed them all?

/M
 

Firevalkyrie

First Post
I'm listening to the Tome's interview with Erik Mona and the thing that I notice that he keeps talking about is "doing it the way we did it before." Nowhere do we hear "trying new things." And that's really in the end my biggest beef with Pathfinder: It's all about retreading the ground we've already trodden, and I for one am not really all that interested in doing that; if I want to play 3.5, I've already got more 3.5 books than I could ever play, so that's not the issue. If I'm going to buy a new edition, I want it to be a new edition, not a fresh coat of paint on the same edition I've been already playing for almost a decade.
 

Well they are changing a few things but its not trying to be a new edition. pathfinder is about keeping 3.5 in print to grow the customer base .It's a tool to sell there bread and butter adventures.
 

occam

Adventurer
Mustrum_Ridcully said:
Hey, if you get to chance to write your own Core Rules, wouldn't you want to tinker with them a bit? ;)

Absolutely. I completely understand the desire to tinker. I just think it's a bad idea to do it too much, when you're basing a product's attraction on compatibility with earlier rules.
 

Remove ads

Top