Runequest owns
D&D 4E [4E Players, mainly] Ever thought of defecting to Pathfinder?
- Thread starter Mercurius
- Start date
Runequest owns
I like to pretend those things don't even exist. It's just easier that way
Argyle King
Legend
A few times I've been tempted to buy Pathfinder, but I just can't quite seem to do it. I like the look of a lot of their products; honestly, I really do. However, upon flipping through the core books, I also noticed that they 'fixed' some of the issues with D&D 3.5 in ways that I'm not entirely thrilled about. To be sure, they did add things which I really really like (capstone abilities for classes is one,) but they also patched some of the holes with things I really don't like at all (as hard is it may be to believe, it is very possible for a smart player to abuse unlimited use of cantrips*.)
*There are other examples, but that's one which is fresh in my memory. Another would be that I find that Pathfinder is only semi-backwards compatible. I have a lot of 3rd edition books which have material I'm unsure about how to modify to fit more fully into Pathfinder. There's also the fact that I can't quite shake the idea that I'd feel as though I was relearning how to play a game I should already know how to play.
Oddly, even though I'm not 4th Edition's biggest fan, it did a lot to help me become more knowledgable about what I want out of an rpg experience. I liked the lessened power curve between levels so much that I discovered I would like to try playing a game without levels. Likewise, the taste of the more gamey play was somewhat bitter in my mouth, and I found that I wanted something which could be more gritty and had more complexity. In short, D&D 4E helped me become a GURPS player.
I still do play 4E. It's a nice game if I don't want to get too deep into some of the things I enjoy or I'm playing with my friends who prefer something more linear. Also, I can now enjoy 4E more that I'm not trying to force it to do things it wasn't designed to do. (As I've said elsewhere, you can do those things, but I got tired of fighting and fiddling with the system.)
If I want more complexity like I had with 3rd Edition, but I don't want to deal with 3rd Edition's problems, I don't feel Pathfinder is the place for me. The folks over at SJG have a game which allows me to have the complexity I liked from the previous version of D&D, and also allows me to take the parts of 4E I liked (the lesser power curve between levels) even further. In addition, I'm able to convert creatures and concepts from both collections of books I have into the same set of rules.
Recently, I have been looking at the Hackmaster stuff. I've never played Hackmaster, but I like the look of their new products. I also like what I've been told about the playstyle that Hackmaster supports. I'm very heavily considering buying some Hackmaster books.
So, where am I now? I guess maybe I could be considered to have jumped ship from D&D depending on how you look at it. I still play D&D. It's just been a really long time since I've given WoTC any of my money (I can't say Hasbro because I recently bought Betrayal At the House on The Hill.) I think the last 4E product I bought was Manual of The Planes. As for Pathfinder, it looks nice, but some sort of mental block prevents me from handing my money to Paizo. Right now, my buying habits are such that -if Steve Jackson Games were the name of a stripper- I'd be helping to put her through college.
*There are other examples, but that's one which is fresh in my memory. Another would be that I find that Pathfinder is only semi-backwards compatible. I have a lot of 3rd edition books which have material I'm unsure about how to modify to fit more fully into Pathfinder. There's also the fact that I can't quite shake the idea that I'd feel as though I was relearning how to play a game I should already know how to play.
Oddly, even though I'm not 4th Edition's biggest fan, it did a lot to help me become more knowledgable about what I want out of an rpg experience. I liked the lessened power curve between levels so much that I discovered I would like to try playing a game without levels. Likewise, the taste of the more gamey play was somewhat bitter in my mouth, and I found that I wanted something which could be more gritty and had more complexity. In short, D&D 4E helped me become a GURPS player.
I still do play 4E. It's a nice game if I don't want to get too deep into some of the things I enjoy or I'm playing with my friends who prefer something more linear. Also, I can now enjoy 4E more that I'm not trying to force it to do things it wasn't designed to do. (As I've said elsewhere, you can do those things, but I got tired of fighting and fiddling with the system.)
If I want more complexity like I had with 3rd Edition, but I don't want to deal with 3rd Edition's problems, I don't feel Pathfinder is the place for me. The folks over at SJG have a game which allows me to have the complexity I liked from the previous version of D&D, and also allows me to take the parts of 4E I liked (the lesser power curve between levels) even further. In addition, I'm able to convert creatures and concepts from both collections of books I have into the same set of rules.
Recently, I have been looking at the Hackmaster stuff. I've never played Hackmaster, but I like the look of their new products. I also like what I've been told about the playstyle that Hackmaster supports. I'm very heavily considering buying some Hackmaster books.
So, where am I now? I guess maybe I could be considered to have jumped ship from D&D depending on how you look at it. I still play D&D. It's just been a really long time since I've given WoTC any of my money (I can't say Hasbro because I recently bought Betrayal At the House on The Hill.) I think the last 4E product I bought was Manual of The Planes. As for Pathfinder, it looks nice, but some sort of mental block prevents me from handing my money to Paizo. Right now, my buying habits are such that -if Steve Jackson Games were the name of a stripper- I'd be helping to put her through college.
I like to pretend those things don't even exist. It's just easier that way
And you're a Call of Cthulhu player.
You can't pretend these horrors don't exist. You have to face them! Like a man! And then go insane and spend the rest of your life babbling at the walls in a lunatic asylum. You know, maybe not facing these things is a good idea after all.
Nikosandros
Golden Procrastinator
I'm not such a huge fan of 4e and I like PF well enough, but I'm 100% with Jack. What do you care what the company is doing? Just play the game that you enjoy the most. It's not like there isn't already enough material available for 4e to last you a very long time...
Holy Bovine
First Post
To answer the question - no I already have 3E D&D.
Cyronax
Explorer
With 4e, I'm able to roughly know that the published classes (paragon paths and epic desinties included) and races options that my players choose are mostly balanced against everything else. Couldn't do that at all in published 3.X. I came to hate prestige classes so much, and I became so bitter after all the rules arguments that seemed to spew out anytime I tried to be creative with moster.
Granted, I had more argumentative and power-gaming players in the mid-2000's, but just looking at a high-level NPC's stat block from Pathfinder shows me that the problems I had with the system are still there.
4e's got some problems. I think some builds have way too many immediate interrupts, and that sort of thing sometimes leads to a lot of backtracking and confusion. BUT, its still a vast improvement on 3.X. I also think its a happy medium between the advanced play of recent years and a harkening back to some of the simplicity of BECMI.
C.I.D.
Granted, I had more argumentative and power-gaming players in the mid-2000's, but just looking at a high-level NPC's stat block from Pathfinder shows me that the problems I had with the system are still there.
4e's got some problems. I think some builds have way too many immediate interrupts, and that sort of thing sometimes leads to a lot of backtracking and confusion. BUT, its still a vast improvement on 3.X. I also think its a happy medium between the advanced play of recent years and a harkening back to some of the simplicity of BECMI.
C.I.D.
(Psi)SeveredHead
Adventurer
You need to stop reading my mind. That's exactly what I was thinking.
Same.
If WotC goes bankrupt and dies, it means I save money by not buying new books. I still wouldn't switch. (Incidentally, a lot of the missteps don't bother me at all. I would have liked to have seen the Class Compendium, but I don't care if the Character Builder is broken, as I never use such tools.)
Droogie128
First Post
Not unless PF has plans to remove vancian spellcasting.
In all seriousness, why would I switch? I still prefer the 4e system. I can continue to play it regardless of what happens.
Also, if WotC decides to start moving towards the digital market, I would gladly hop on board. I would re-sub to DDi in a second if they started putting full released under it.
In all seriousness, why would I switch? I still prefer the 4e system. I can continue to play it regardless of what happens.
Also, if WotC decides to start moving towards the digital market, I would gladly hop on board. I would re-sub to DDi in a second if they started putting full released under it.
Droogie128
First Post
Not unless PF has plans to remove vancian spellcasting.
In all seriousness, why would I switch? I still prefer the 4e system. I can continue to play it regardless of what happens.
Also, if WotC decides to start moving towards the digital market, I would gladly hop on board. I would re-sub to DDi in a second if they started putting full releases under it.
In all seriousness, why would I switch? I still prefer the 4e system. I can continue to play it regardless of what happens.
Also, if WotC decides to start moving towards the digital market, I would gladly hop on board. I would re-sub to DDi in a second if they started putting full releases under it.
