A mini-rant re: Pathfinder and D&D

[Crothian]

I don't know Pathfinder well enough to say this with absolute certainty, but I'm pretty sure that you can make a 3.5E character and sit down at a Pathfinder table and be just fine.

You wouldn't be just fine. They changed the rules for the races, the classes, and many feats and spells. You would have or know what a CMB or CMD was. And you'd be using the wrong books.

Again, there's nothing wrong with that except that not recognizing this and saying that Pathfinder is a different game or not a variety of D&D seems like willfully ignoring its etiology.

Arguing if a difference is a small or not is pointless, but I think we could easily come up with a 100 or more differences between the games using just the core rules. And if we use other books then that number of changes will easily increase by a factor or 10. Saying Pathfinder is different from D&D is not ignoring that its roots were in D&D. It is acknowledging the Pathfinder grew up and has evolved into something different from D&D.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

Haven't read the whole thread, but to answer the OP:

I doubt WotC would want Pathfinder called D&D (if they had any say).

 

[Reynard]

Video games are not role-playing games. That is, the term "TRPG" to distinguish from "cRPG" is incorrect. They are wholly different game-forms.

Wrong. There is a definition of "RPG" as it relates to video/computer games. That definition is, essentially, managed development of one or more distinct characters. You will notice, for example, that certain RTS or FPS games get labelled with having "RPG elements" precisely because the player can affect how the characters or "hero units" develop over time.

It is important, I think, to use the terminology of the field which one is discussing, rather than trying to subvert that terminology via another field with similar or identical terms.

 

[Chaos Trip Studios]

Anything that is d20 comes from the same source, the great and powerful OGL. So its all rock and roll, no matter what else you want to call it. As for me, I think its great that people didn't give up on the d20 system just because Wizards came out with a new edition. Its really the exact opposite of the TSR groupies who bitched and moaned about 3rd edition. Unlike AD&D, the d20 system was worth saving. Instead of complaining about the new version, they just kept playing what they liked. As for me, I still play 3rd edition from my original core books so its good to know that I'll be able to at least replace my players guide when it falls completely apart. But if I could find a used PHB in shape I'd buy that over Pathfinder, just from cheapness.

Well for starters it's actually not an EXACT copy of 3.5. There's like, a 10 page thread over on Paizo detailing the differences between Pathfinder and 3.5. Even opening the Core Rulebook and reading the Classes chapter you'll see there are quite a few differences between the Core Pathfinder Classes and their 3.5 counterparts.

Also people raved about Pathfinder because most of them didn't want to give up support for their 3.5 based games. While Pathfinder isn't exactly like 3.5 it's enough like 3.5 that you'll still be able to use your 3.5 adventures and supplements with Pathfinder with some adjustments. I'm running Curse of the Crimson Throne (a 3.5 AP) with very little in the way of changes (unless it's something that I want to change). So yeah, there's that part of it.

 

[BryonD]

Pathfinder is D&D.

And yes, so is 4E.

Depending on your context both of these may be true.
Depending on your context both of these may be false.

If both are true at the same time then the term D&D is so completely ambiguous that it offers nothing more insightful than just saying Fantasy Role Playing Game.

If both are true then GURPS Fantasy is also "D&D".

 

[BryonD]

Video games are not role-playing games. That is, the term "TRPG" to distinguish from "cRPG" is incorrect. They are wholly different game-forms.

Yeah right.....

And next thing you'll be trying to tell me that Panda Bears are not Bears.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Yeah right.....

And next thing you'll be trying to tell me that Panda Bears are not Bears.

That is fine, as long as you leave the koalas alone.

The Auld Grump

 

[Gentlegamer]

Wrong. There is a definition of "RPG" as it relates to video/computer games. That definition is, essentially, managed development of one or more distinct characters. You will notice, for example, that certain RTS or FPS games get labelled with having "RPG elements" precisely because the player can affect how the characters or "hero units" develop over time.

It is important, I think, to use the terminology of the field which one is discussing, rather than trying to subvert that terminology via another field with similar or identical terms.

I agree with you. There is a genre of video game called "RPG" (which includes mechanics borrowed from D&D such as experience points and levels) which is accurate for that game-form. The problem is when the term RPG is meant to encompass every activity to which that term has applied, intending them to be largely interchangeable.

 

[Reynard]

I agree with you. There is a genre of video game called "RPG" (which includes mechanics borrowed from D&D such as experience points and levels) which is accurate for that game-form. The problem is when the term RPG is meant to encompass every activity to which that term has applied, intending them to be largely interchangeable.

Right. Context matters. When I ask Bill and Bob if they want to do some roleplaying, I don't expect them to show up wearing catholic schoolgirl outfits, saying they have been ever so naughty and need to be punished.

 

[BriarMonkey]

... therefore, it is D&D. Believe it or not.

I choose to not. It is my opinion. I am not forcing it on anyone. By stating one's opinion one allows that others may understand from where their arguments stem - a point of reference.

You can choose to accept it or not, but the choice is ultimately yours. And that choice will have zero impact on my perceptions or opinions. Of course, if we are talking quantum physics, which I know little about, my opinions can be changed by presenting alternatives.

I tried 4e, and in my mind, the feel is completely wrong. I went to Pathfinder, which feels like what I want, so there I am. So, my opinion on 4e is fixed.

Just because something is labeled as something, doesn't make it so. If the game of Monopoly was redesigned so that you no longer bought houses and hotels, but instead souped up your spaceship for intergalactic trade warfare, would you consider it Monopoly? It may have the same name, but no, it wouldn't be the same game.

Oh, and I actually did qualify my original statement - the part that says "And for me". Funny how when quotes are torn apart, one seems to use only those couple of words that seem to try to make their point...

I'm of the firm belief that one should play what they want and what makes them happy. There is no such thing as badwrongfun, in my view, when it comes to RPGs, boardgames, CRPGs, MMOs, and the like.