A mini-rant re: Pathfinder and D&D

[The Shaman]

Actually, I did answer your question. Read it again.

No. you danced around answering it.

It's not a complicated question, and the courtesy of a yes or no answer, in keeping with your original post, would be appreciated.

 

[Rabulias]

For that matter, there are current arguments to increase the number of kingdoms, with the establishment of domains....

Just great! That's all we need! Cats with Chaos domain powers!

 

[gamerprinter]

Nevertheless, saying "4E is not D&D" should be avoided unless there is an accompanying subjective personal qualifier, as the categorical implication that is inherently present in the text is all the apparent without the clarification.

Oh, I certainly agree - but I don't really expect every poster to be clear like that. So I won't argue against a point by assuming the poster actually meant something more than what is posted. I would ask that poster to qualify his statement before assuming any detractions. Some people who post are in high school, or as I said before, truly non-English speakers. Not everyone has enough grasp of the language to discuss idiosyncracies in logical discussion.

 

[Mercurius]

No. you danced around answering it.

It's not a complicated question, and the courtesy of a yes or no answer, in keeping with your original post, would be appreciated.

Actually, I did answer you. I will give you the courtesy of a more nuanced response, as "yes" or "no" only makes sense depending upon the context. I'll re-quote what I said because you'll be able to find your answer there. But to re-phrase, there might be a "no" or a "yes" depending upon the view; 1 is entirely subjective and depends upon the individual, so if you say Lamentations feels like D&D to you then its D&D; the answer to 2 is clearly no--only what is legally branded as D&D is D&D; the answer to 3 is probably yes in terms of retro-clones; and the answer to 4 is also yes (in other words, to my non-gamer wife Lamentations, Castles & Crusades and even Ars Magica is D&D; she might pause at Traveler as she would likely say "I thought D&D was fantasy").

Anyhoo, here's the quote:

I remember having a similar discussion about a year ago in which I came to four general views as to what D&D is, and all are "true":

1) D&D is what feels like D&D to me (personal/subjective)
2) D&D is what is branded as D&D (legal)
3) D&D is any game that bears the same general rules and principles of some form of branded D&D (OGL, retro-clones, etc)
4) D&D is any RPG or nerdy activity that bears some passing resemblance to D&D ("non-gamer perspective")

It seems that the discussion is bouncing back and forth between 2 and 3; I think they're both true, depending upon what perspective we're taking (just as Danny saying "4E is not D&D to me" is true, but only from the first perspective; it is actually false from the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th perspectives).

It might also be a matter of to what degree a game is related to D&D, or "part of the family." Pathfinder is, in a way, a daughter of 3.5 that got married and changed her last name. Some of the retro-clones are similar, although some are more akin to cousins. But they are still all closely related. Savage Worlds, on the other hand, is more distantly related but still has a common ancestor.

 

[Pilgrim]

An Android tablet has a similar look, style, feel, system, features and functions as that of the Apple iPad. But that does not make it an iPad.

Pathfinder, as well as other iterations of the d20 system, may also have a similar look, style, feel, system, features, and functions as D&D. But that does not make them D&D.

It's just that simple.

 

[gamerprinter]

An Android tablet has a similar look, style, feel, system, features and functions as that of the Apple iPad. But that does not make it an iPad.

Pathfinder, as well as other iterations of the d20 system, may also have a similar look, style, feel, system, features, and functions as D&D. But that does not make them D&D.

It's just that simple.

By your definition of D&D, no. However, not everyone agrees with your definition. As stated many times on this thread by multiple posters, what the legal or dow jones definition of D&D is not necessarily the same definition used by various gamers who play RPGs. So until we can all agree with a single definition on what D&D is, there is no simple answer.

Your definition seems to be D&D requires the brand D&D from it's proper owners - WotC/Hasbro, and from your point of view, the answer is simple.

To me, Pathfinder is D&D, in spirit if not legally D&D - but I'm not a lawyer, a person of interest to purchase the IP, nor are we in a court of law, so who actually owns the IP of D&D is meaningless (to me.) To me what makes D&D is how the game plays, not some logo on a cover.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

So until we can all agree with a single definition on what D&D is, there is no simple answer.

And as should be obvious to anyone at this point, we are not going to agree on a single definition.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

And as should be obvious to anyone at this point, we are not going to agree on a single definition.

Or even two....

The Auld Grump

 

[Aramax]

Since D&D is now 4th,and has almost nothing in common w 3.5 and Pathfinder(Other than some superficial things)I would say that Pathfinder and D&D are not the same thing.The D&D 'brand' has moved on to something mutant,so I disagree w/OP.
Remember things like rolled saves and non static HP and AC that is not level dependant are NO LONGER what D&D is.
Like it or not 4th is D&D,Pathfinder is not.

 

[gamerprinter]

And as should be obvious to anyone at this point, we are not going to agree on a single definition.

Or even two....

The Auld Grump

Yes, it's kind of implied in my mention of it.