D&D 3.x gamers who skipped 4e, why are you not "upgrading" to Pathfinder?

[haakon1]

Pathfinder's not better, it's just different.

Not that different, mind you, which is why I don't see the point in switching over.

This.

And basic inertia:

1) I have a metric ton of books.

2) One of my players yelled at me for frequent edition changes/making him buy new books (we started with AD&D in 1998, then 3.0, then 3.5). I don't like taking money out of my player's pockets, since not everyone has the same resources in real life.

3) I know the rules. The players (mostly) know the rules. Learning new rules would take away from playing, and thinking about playing. Rules aren't the point of the game, at all, for me and my peeps.

4) Not broken. My players never did the bad wrongfun things that made 3.5e broken, so we don't see a need for a fix. We were never CharOp folks.

I do buy plenty of Pathfinder stuff though. I want to support Paizo, and I like reading the modules & adventure paths. Perhaps someday I will convert them, or switch to PF.

 

[Uder]

Pathfinder looks good, but I have so much 3.5 material that I can wait to buy into it. I'm pretty sure I'll switch somewhere down the road, but with my current 3.5 campaign I think I'm set for at least two more years. I usually run a couple of short campaigns for other games as a break between D&D games... so maybe in 5 years or so?

 

[Ranes]

I have plenty of near-mint and very playable 3.5 books and, as others have said, Pathfinder doesn't tackle 3.5's problem children. So 3.5 is fine for our group. Pathinder/GM modules are a different matter. I've bought a few of those. And the couple of X Revisited books have been well worth it.

 

[humble minion]

Still playing 3.5.

Mostly at this point it's because we've got a long-running 3.5e campaign going that I as GM don't want to convert over (and it's the Savage Tide AP from dungeon that we're playing, largely for the reason that the prewritten AP minimised preparation time, an advantage that conversion over to a new system would completely nullify)

Next campaign - who knows. The group as a whole has ruled out 4e, and it'll probably come down to the choice of the bloke who's going to run the game. Pathfinder and WHFRP are the most likely contenders, with Hero and Mutants and Masterminds the outside runners.

It won't be 3.5e though, for all the usual reasons (high-level play, uber-buffing, etc, etc). At the moment it's inertia keeping us with 3.5e rather than any other reason.

 

[Gilladian]

I like 3.5. We don't play high level Dnd, so most of the trouble spots never bothered us. Yeah, creating NPCs is a pain. Which is why I have a metric ton of Dungeon Magazines, Modules, and the NPC wiki.

I like tinkering - I can't tinker with 4e in the way I have with 3.5. I have unique races, prestige classes, etc... that are tailored to my world. It was a LOT of work to get right, and I'm not abandoning it for a new set of rules that I really don't like.

My players like 3.5. They've made NO moves to suggest they want me to switch. 2 of us play in an online 4e game, and actively dislike the rules. 2 others HAVE played some 4e, and still do once in a while, but don't much like it. The last player has never even mentioned it, and I know he can't afford the change - he's still using his 3.0 PH!

Lastly, I think Pathfinder is a powerup. I'm all about low-level, low-power play. If I did ANY switch in rules, it would be to give E6 a try. Also, I like Paizo, but adventure paths are not my thing - I gave one a try, and I got BORED running it. So I'll stick with what I'm happy with.

 

[Vascant]

While I still purchase everything Paizo puts out we just haven't had a break in the campaign to start a new one under their rules. This is not uncommon for us though as we do tend to run campaigns for years and this one started about when 4e was released and we decided to not move in that direction.

 

[Kris]

Well ...I got back into RPG's when 3.0 came out ...which also coincided with a time when I had a lot of spare cash - so I ended up with a shelf full of 3.0 stuff ...a lot of good stuff ...and also some not so good stuff . So I really have a ton of stuff there (in near mint condition) that I've hardly used ...and I also quite like the system.

I will admit that the only reason I 'upgraded' to 3.5 (as a player ...I only have the two PHB's and the DMG (for the magic items & PrC sections) ) is because that is the game I've been playing as a 'player' for a while now - otherwise I would have happily stuck with 3.0.

But if it looked like I had the option of playing in a pathfinder (or maybe even a 4E) game in the future, I would probably pick up the PHB equivalent ...but that is all. But in all truth, if I had the choice to play/run a different system to 3.x then I would prefer to play something other than D&D (including pathfinder) ...which is probably why the only two RPG books I have purchased in the last few years have been the Savage Worlds book and the BRP book.

So basically, I might eventually get the Pathfinder Core Rulebook - but I'll need a reason for doing so - other than it being the 'latest' version (if that makes any sense at all). The same goes for other games/editions - as I'd be just as likely to pick up an old 2E book off ebay if I needed it for a particular game (i.e. I'm not gonna run out and get it now, but I might grab a copy if someone was thinking of running a campaign).

 

[Nagol]

I bought the Pathfinder rules and like what I see.

Despite that, there are a few reasons I haven't suggested a change-over to the group.

I'm the only one to purchase the ruleset. One other player to my knowledge grabbed the free beta and liked it, but the group hasn't been clamouring for it.

D&D 3.5 is working fine.

My campaign is in its seventh year and the changeover is bound to be somewhat disruptive.

The income levels among the group members are highly variant and I don't want to the lower income parties to feel an expectation to purchase anything.

I'm been feeling burnt out for a while and a different GM is stepping up with a fill-in. A change in systems just before taking a break is a a poor choice.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

I DM and play 3.x, and it's a perfect fit for me. Because....

1) I'm very au fait with the rules - including quirks and breaks - and have no trouble negotiating them (or ignoring them where appropriate)

2) In terms of precise characterization and realizing character concept mechanically, 3.x offers the most comprehensive resources. You can build pretty much anything. Precise characterization is important to me.

3) I don't really need anyone else's house rules, as I can make my own where needed.

 

[Holy Bovine]

We've seen more than a few posts over time inquiring why folks didn't upgrade to 4e, what would it take to upgrade to 4e, and other variations on that theme. Many responses come back that Pathfinder fits better, or products Paizo offers fit their itch better.

Yet there are some D&D 3.x gamers who have not upgraded to either Pathfinder or 4e.

Now, this may prove to be a short, little trafficked thread, but would anyone who has remained with D&D 3.x like to use this time to explain why they have not upgraded to Pathfinder for their 3.x gaming?

Please try not to stray into fields of edition wars.

[Edit] Inspired by haakon1's thread here.

For the simple reason that I don't consider Pathfinder an 'upgrade'. It has some good rule changes in it but made zero headway in the problems my groups encountered with 3E.