Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GreyLord" data-source="post: 5680131" data-attributes="member: 4348">I still have 8 more pages to ford through before reading the rest of this thread, but I couldn't let this pass.First...80-90% of the people who played older editions PRE-3e could care less.  They played it during the fad years and have gone on.Second, many of those who DID play and enjoyed AD&D DID NOT consider 3.X in any way or form D&D.  They probably are happy to let Pathfinder take up the mantle...but they wouldn't consider it D&D either...many may still be offended.So what you are left with in the statement are that 70-80% of those who played 3.X D&D and loved it...etc...etc...etc...I don't know.  3.X went more the Rolemaster route and appeased more those who would go towards the skill sets rather than the class routes.Pathfinder further refined the game...and I consider it a true heir to the 3.X line of games...or D20 if you want.4e has the draw that there are DEFINED archtypes.  You can't just jump from class to class.  You don't just go up a level and decide one day...oh...I'll be a Doctor now...even though that should take me 4 years of premed and 4 years of medical school...I just need to take a level.  Then the next day...ah...I went up another level...I'll be a preist now without getting that 4 year degree and advanced degrees in divinity for another few years of education.It sticks with the idea that each class actually has some difficulty in obtaining it and training for it which is more in line with the original AD&D.On the other hand, the powers system in 4e is so drastically different as to boggle an old schooler's mind.  That probably is the thing that sets it apart so strongly from older editions.  Furthermore, there is that outward appearance that the creators of 4e tried to make it so balanced that all the classes eventually have very similar abilities once you level them up for a while (not that this is so...as I said, the outward appearance).  That makes it more for a mesh instead of the archtype that you want.3.X in that light, though classes aren't as strictly defined in who has to be what and remain that way...seems to retain class Flavor a LOT better from an outward appearance.  With Pathfinder as the heir apparant...and making the class strictures even more defined, I'd say that the archtypes can be more strongly appealing to the old time player.Does that offend enough people from both groups?  So I'm the most hated person on ENworld.I may be inclined to say a LARGE number of those who enjoyed 3.X would see Pathfinder more as D&D than 4e...at least in the heart of it.Something many 3.X players don't want to admit...WotC/TSR had the Diablo license when they created 3e.  They actually created the Diablo game first for 2.5e (in that time period...when the seeds of feats, movement in squares, and skill sets came about with the Player's Options books).  They also released another Diablo version for 3e.Ironically their classes didn't replicate the ones from the game as much as they could have...BUT...a LOT of the feats and skills they included in 2.5...and even more so 3e reflect an influence either from D&D on Diablo...or Diablo on D&D (whirlwind being the one of the more blatant ripoffs in 3e from Diablo...though whirlwind was actually something available in 2.5 as well if I recall correctly).Yes, in my mind...Diablo I, and Diablo 2 had a heavy impact on 3e...but not quite as much as Rolemaster.IN that same light, I'd say there are many elements of MMORPGs, such as WoW that 4e has based items off of.  I think that is even more blatant in many regards than what 3e took from the Diablo series.On a sillier note...This  <a href="http://images.wikia.com/pathfinder/images/0/0b/Amiri.jpg" target="_blank">http://images.wikia.com/pathfinder/images/0/0b/Amiri.jpg</a>  and this<a href="http://images.wikia.com/pathfinder/images/c/c5/Inquisitor_sketch.jpg" target="_blank">http://images.wikia.com/pathfinder/images/c/c5/Inquisitor_sketch.jpg</a>are women?Yes...I guess they are...scary women too!!!True, though I don't think 3e's biggest drawback is that at all for me...I do agree that 3e definately does NOT follow the saem role philosophy that 4e does...not does Pathfinder.<a href="http://images.wikia.com/pathfinder/images/5/52/Lini.jpg" target="_blank">http://images.wikia.com/pathfinder/images/5/52/Lini.jpg</a>That's a woman?  I thought that was a male druid with it's humanoid plant companion!!<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/angel.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":angel:" title="Angel    :angel:" data-shortname=":angel:" />I too am excited about the Pathfinder Beginner's Box, I wish they would just hurry up and get it here.No...then again, not a mathematic major...but I do have close to an aneurysm whenever someone states THAC0 was hard to grasp and they had a hard time with it...I always say they must have flunked 3rd grade math...but in truth they start teaching subtraction in 1st grade!!!Unfortunatley my wife is one who also states she can't comprehend THAC0!Lucky for her I didn't marry her for her brains or that WOULD CAUSE an aneurysm!!!I find them confusing at times too.  Sometimes I'm still not entirely clear what a controller is. I'm an old guy though, I understand the roles are there so that the MMORPG kids can easily understand what the roles are supposed to do...in otherwords it speaks their language.  It could also be people have just been feeding me a bunch of huey instead.As I already stated, 90% of longtime D&D fans don't even consider 3.X or Pathfinder OR 4e D&D.  They consider D&D (meaning the original BX/BECM or AD&D) as D&D.  They played it in their youth, and now they dont' anymore.  Many have lost, donated away the books or have them gathering dust somewhere in their attic.It's MORE correct tos ay PF resonates with many 3.X fans...which it does spectacularly.100% agree with this statement.I felt the same way about 3.X overall.  In the end I think Gygax may have as well.  At least I think he was unenamored of how heavy handed it had turned out. I think He was still glad about the RPG'ers playing it and enjoying RPing.  I think he may have turned once or twice in his grave with 4e being called D&D.  (okay, here I go being sacriligious)...who knows...maybe it was the thought of what 4e was bringing that brought him to an early grave (yes, morbid humor, I think gygax may actually have laughed politely at that one...politely I said...not that he would have actually laughed).  I think he may have actually liked PF better.  That said, just like he was glad about RPG'ers playing 3.X, he'd be happy with RPG'ers playing 4e and enjoying RPing.  I think he loved the OGL most of all the modern ideas that came about.  I think he preferred making his OWN systems above any of them.Arneson...don't know...he seemed to go with the flow of everything and run the systems called D&D at the time.  They even came out with a Blackmoor 4e campaign set.That's probably why I'm so much happier with the system being called Pathfinder instead of D&D these days.  I think Pathfinder is an outstanding system...I just didn't like it trying to replace the older versions of AD&D and D&D and calling itself such.And now that I've offended everyone and everybody, I'll probably be lambasted...especially for summarizing half this thread with my responses in one long post.</blockquote>

Verification