D&D 4E [4E Players, mainly] Ever thought of defecting to Pathfinder?

[Nahat Anoj]

Have you thought seriously about "defecting" to Pathfinder or another edition of D&D or game altogether? (I have also considered Savage Worlds or Star Wars Saga or numerous other games, but my group and I are all a bit hooked on D&D, at least at the moment). Have you been questioning WotC and thought of switching to a different game in order to support a company that you respect more? What is your experience?

WotC's standing in my eyes has not diminished, and I've lost no respect for them. While I've been thinking about using another, non-4e game as my game of choice, this is simply because 4e no longer really scratches the itch for me. I think it's simple fatigue, as I've been playing it pretty much exclusively since it came out - 2.5 years is a long time for me to run a game.

The other games I have seriously considered lately for actual play are Savage Worlds and Mutants & Masterminds. The DCC RPG that will be coming out later this year has also piqued my interest. I've also thought about playing one of the various D&D retroclones, or even 1e or OD&D itself, just to get back to basics. I am not interested in Pathfinder, and I don't think I'll play WotC-style D&D (I consider Pathfinder to be a branch of this) for a while.

My desire to play a game has little to do with respec/contempt for the company who makes it. I simply have a desire to play a certain game, and I feel certain systems can help fulfill that desire at this moment.

 

[drothgery]

I guess I think Pathfinder didn't really fix the problems that got our group to stop playing 3.5 (though unfortunately IMO, 4e didn't stick either) ... and I've got a ton of 3.5 books already. So if I were going to play a 3.x game, I'd just play 3.5.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Yeah, I don't get all the breast beating about game companies and schedules and all. I buy what I like to play, just like I eat the food that I prefer too. I like 4e. WotC took a fairly bold step by breaking with past editions of D&D somewhat. The result is a better game in a lot of ways. Not as polished in some respects, but it is fun and meets my needs. PF is warmed over 3.5. That's OK, but Paizo isn't going to break any new ground with that, they're not offering me a new gaming experience. They're offering me a somewhat more polished version of the same old thing. I think THAT is what you get when you let the fans of the existing game essentially design the new game, you're stuck forever in the same spot.

In any case 4e has tons of stuff for me to use, it isn't going away anytime soon. Even if WotC pulled back to a very low level of support the game is there, it is the game I want to play, and so I'll just keep playing it.

As far as giving my money to Paizo as some kind of reward. I don't want to reward them particularly. I don't buy things to reward people anyway. Even if I did, what am I rewarding them for? Sticking to an old formula and an old system? Now, if they had a game as good as 4e AND they had the nicer adventure products and more interesting artwork, maybe I'd want to with it, I don't know. I just don't see the Paizo formula ever winding up creating a better rules system than 4e.

 

[Windjammer]

You can play a Dragonlance Campaign in 4e currently. No set class or paragon path for Knights of Solamnia however, but other things are easy enough.

Actually, you're not entirely correct here. While not worked out into full paragon path level, the Knights of Solmania made a reappearance as "The solemn order of the knights of Saint Vercesien the Gold" in Draconomicon 2. In the same book you'll also find Draconians, and several of the Chronicles' main NPCs converted for ready play, like Silvara, in both elven and dragon form, or Paladin, whose human form is given as the Old Man with the Canaries, who of course corresponds to Fizban.

I heartily recommend Draconomicon 2 to Dragonlance fans looking into 4E. Another thing worth looking at is Ed Greenwood's write-up for Returned Albeir in the Forgotton Realms Campaign Guide for 4E, which struck me as rather Dragonlance'esque.

The key change to make with 4E, in my estimate, is to take out the Dragonborn as a player or NPC race. Instead of draconians worshipping Bahamut and Tiamat, only have them worship Tiamat i.e. Takhisis.

That leaves kenders and gully dwarves.

And thank god for that.

 

[GameDoc]

That leaves kenders and gully dwarves

I thinks it's easy to use 4e halflings as kender. It's more about how they are role-played.

For gully dwarves, you could just use regular dwarves and stipulate that only a dwarf PC with an 8 or lower Intelligence can be a gully dwarf. Such a character would be among the smartest gully dwarves on Krynn. Again, how the character is role-played has a lot to do with it.

The major stumbling block for these races is that in 4e, Wisdom covers both perceptiveness of physical stimuli and sound judgement. The latter isn't something kender or gully dwarves are noted for. How would you account for that mechanically?

 

[DEFCON 1]

'Defect' isn't the right word for me, personally. I currently do not play Pathfinder, nor do I own it... but I am also not adverse to it. It'd basically come down to whether someone I know is going to run it, and if I want/have the time to play it with them. I DM 4E right now because that is the game I got my players together to play. But if someone else said they had a PF game to play, sure I'd play it. Heck, I've played over a dozen different campaigns with over a dozen different game systems this past decade, so 'loyalty' really has nothing to do with it. If the game looks good and the game master knows how to put on a great game, I'm right there.

I'm also like Abdul in that the company that produces a game has absolutely no bearing on whether I play it. WotC could be revealed to be a Neo-Nazi organization, and I'd still play 4E. I don't care about the people behind the project, I care about the project. It's the same reason why an author's personal politics do not impact whether I'll read their work... the piece of art is the piece of art, and I'll judge it on itself alone.

 

[Scholar & Brutalman]

Not to Pathfinder. I already played 3rd edition for years, until I was thouroughly sick of its problems, and nothing I've read about Pathfinder makes me think they've solved those problems. Additionally, the only Paizo adventure path I played (Age of Worms) didn't inspire me to additional interest in their products.

I don't have much investment in WotC as a company. If they make products I like, I'll buy them, if they don't, meh. I didn't buy anything from them for the last 2 years of 3.5. At the moment I'm enjoying 4e; when that ends I'll look for something else.

 

[Dausuul]

IThe major stumbling block for these races is that in 4e, Wisdom covers both perceptiveness of physical stimuli and sound judgement. The latter isn't something kender or gully dwarves are noted for. How would you account for that mechanically?

Racial bonus to Perception.

 

[Firebeetle]

I'd rather eat a bowl of warm monkey feces than play 3.5 or Pathfinder. I've been playing D&D for 30 years, starting with the original red box and through all the editions. I've never had as much fun playing as I have with 4e. I have many fond memories of the past, but now is what I think of being a "Golden Age" for my roleplaying experience.

Even if WotC were to close shop tomorrow (which they aren't, I think all this speculation is a bit ridiculous) I would continue to play 4e until I die. I love it that much, and I have enough tools to work with it forever or adapt into other genres (I'm already considering sci-fi.)

I find Pathfinder a giant step backwards. I found 3.5 very frustrating toward the end and considered leaving rpgs forever. At the very least, I was thinking how to adapt my minis and maps to another system. Of course, the 3.5 bard (my all-time favorite class since 1e) sucked and I don't see the Pathfinder one as much of an improvement. It certainly doesn't compare with the 4e uberrock bard.

I'm 4e until I die. I'm still confused how they are able to do it, when I understood the original OGL was something WotC could stop whenever they wanted. Does anyone know?

 

[Nikosandros]

I'm still confused how they are able to do it, when I understood the original OGL was something WotC could stop whenever they wanted. Does anyone know?

The OGL is actually irrevocable.