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

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

Dr. McCoy: *serious* "Son, i have to tell you something that might hurt you." *Father-to-son-stare* "Let´s say it like this: we are NOT all created equal..."

One of the exact reasons that if Pathfinder wasn't going to change it from 3.5 then the whole exercise was pointless.

Since Paizo switched to Pathfinder from 3.5e rules, their art work has gotten more Over the Top, and I don't like that.

In my case I don't mind it, and kind of like it sometimes (I bought the bestiary solely on the art). The 3.5 art just has a more inspiring "feel" to it.

 

[Shazman]

Fighter: "I don´t know doc, i somehow feel so weak. Its all these casters around me, yaknow, i think i caught something from them."

Dr. McCoy: "Don´t sweat it son. Here´s a prescription for some high-level feats. It won´t help your condition, but it´s sure good for morale."

Fighter: "But those casters do not need high level feats to enjoy life! I don´t understand!"

Dr. McCoy: *serious* "Son, i have to tell you something that might hurt you." *Father-to-son-stare* "Let´s say it like this: we are NOT all created equal..."

Very funny, but in my experiences playing Pathfinder, it was the barbarians and fighters that made the casters feel gimped, not the other way around.

 

[wingsandsword]

Here is why I didn't switch to Pathfinder (or 4e)

D&D 3.5 is probably the closest that any mass-produced RPG will get to the game I want.

When our group was playing AD&D 2e back circa 1998 and '99 we had to house rule the heck out of it to make it something we could really get behind. We had house rules regarding multiclassing, dual and multiclassing, racial level limits, raising ability scores as a character levels up, and an elaborate set of proficiencies that granted special abilities in combat or with magic, and we allowed a lot of 1e classes in like Assassins (modified to go up to 20th level) and Barbarians. We even had a homebrew psionicist/fighter hybrid class that was to the psionicist what the ranger was the the druid or the paladin was to the cleric.

When D&D 3e came out, we were very happy to see that the changes to the system largely reflected the direction we wanted D&D to go, just mounted on the more robust d20 system instead of the AD&D mechanics. It was kinda eerie actually we had precursors to fighter and metamagic feats, the psychic warrior, the 3e multiclassing system et.al. If I didn't know it was impossible I'd swear WotC R&D had been looking in on our home games.

So we snapped up D&D 3e with gusto and switched over quickly and pretty much in unison. As we played the heck out of it, there were cracks and flaws in the system that popped up and needed house-rule fixing, but nothing anywhere near as major as there were in 1e or 2e. When 3.5 came out, it fixed some things that needed fixing (front-loaded class features), and some things that didn't need fixing (pokemounts), but it managed to be even better than 3.0

So, my house rule list for 3.5 is pretty short, way shorter than it has been for any prior edition.

4e is a complete other direction for the game, and something totally unlike the game I was playing. For the first time, a D&D edition change was to something that didn't seem like the logical growth of the game, but instead a totally new fantasy RPG with the D&D name bolted on it. 4e was right off the table.

Pathfinder is fine and good, but it was also unnecessary changes. I recognize it as the torch-bearer of the 3.x design lineage, but I've got enough 3.5 books to play for quite literally several lifetimes. Settings, splatbooks, suppliments, miniatures, core books, for campaigns for the rest of my life.

So, I don't see the need to upgrade from 3.5 to any other game for my D&D needs, and I've got enough 3.5 to satisfy me.

 

[Greg K]

Strange, I thought that I had posted this earlier, but I don't see the post.

My reasons for switching is that I and my friends do not see it as an improvement based upon the Beta. There are a few elements that we think are better (various level speeds, increased hit die for rogues and wizards, wizard's arcane bond, some of the feats, and some of the spell changes) and worth incorporating into 3e. However, there was much more we did not like (and things we wanted to see changed were not). Some of things that we did not like include:

1. Bringing the power level of several of the classes up to the cleric, druid and wizard. We wanted to see the reverse.

2. Most of the class changes themselves. A few that sounded interesting (e.g., cleric domain powers over levels and sorcerer bloodlines) didn't impress us with the execution.

3. Channeling positve energy. In our opinion, the damage and the healing would have been good as individual domain abilities. As a default ability, no thanks.

4. The skill bonus for favored skills and not increasing skill points for the 2+int classes.

5. Still no desire to run past 10-12th level.

 

[Diamond Cross]

I haven't read any of the books yet, can someone summarize the differences to me?

Plus, I'm burnt out on edition changes, edition wars, and things like "everybody's gotta have their own take on the rules" and modify the rules to their liking.

Over the years I've collected a lot of RPGS and have seen multiple editions of the games.

Star Wars -D6 (2 editions of d6 even) to d20 (Haven't touched the new Saga stuff)
MSH - Classic, Advanced, Saga, Diceless
DCH - Three edition changes.
Palladium - well, just quite a bit there.
D&D - Started with 1e, then 2e, then 3e & 3.5e
Champions - Two different Editions then TNE
Traveller - one edition to TNE
Mutants And Masterminds - Three Editions Now
Aberrant - d10 to d20
WoD - original, Second edition, now New WoD.
Top Secret - Original then SI
Gamma World - 2e & 3e (I still love the rainbow resolution table though, which I miss)
BTVS - Original and revised plus supplements
AFMBE - Just a lot of books
d20 Modern plus its associated books such as d20 Future

So as you can see, I've been through a lot of games since about 1980 or so.

Don't get me wrong, I love these games, but I'm just burnt out from the craze to get all the necessary books which means spending money I don't have on thrty five to fifty dollar books.

So I'm really not going to go out of my way to get the pathfinder.

 

[Imhotepthewise]

I haven't had any veterans to play with for a while. The learning curve for new players is easier for 3.5 than Pathfinder. That being said, Pathfider has many good ideas.

 

[gamerprinter]

One of the exact reasons that if Pathfinder wasn't going to change it from 3.5 then the whole exercise was pointless.

I've already said it in this thread, the primary reason Paizo came out with PF was to have a system that supported their APs so they can keep them on FLGS shelves - WotC pulled the 3e books from the distribution channels. PF is the current 3.5 rules to keep them a viable business. Since they had to spend money on a new printing, might as well tweak the rules. It wasn't created to replace 3.5, rather to keep 3.5 as a current system (to keep 3.5 related hardcovers on the shelves - you have noticed that you can't buy 3.5 books new anymore, right?)

In my case I don't mind it, and kind of like it sometimes (I bought the bestiary solely on the art). The 3.5 art just has a more inspiring "feel" to it.

Personally, 3.5 art was worse, all that "dungeon punk" look, suits made out of a thousand leather belts... hideous, hideous... (I must qualify saying that I don't care for the 'big eyed' pseudo anime look in the PF art either, it looks much like a cartoon - I prefer realistic art, not cartoon.)

GP

 

[gamerprinter]

You got that backwards

I haven't had any veterans to play with for a while. The learning curve for new players is easier for 3.5 than Pathfinder. That being said, Pathfider has many good ideas.

Uh, I think you got that backwards, I find PF an easier pick-up than 3.5, mostly because it makes more sense than the previous, obviously YMMV.

GP

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

I've already said it in this thread, the primary reason Paizo came out with PF was to have a system that supported their APs so they can keep them on FLGS shelves - WotC pulled the 3e books from the distribution channels. PF is the current 3.5 rules to keep them a viable business. Since they had to spend money on a new printing, might as well tweak the rules. It wasn't created to replace 3.5, rather to keep 3.5 as a current system (to keep 3.5 related hardcovers on the shelves - you have noticed that you can't buy 3.5 books new anymore, right?)

It was still pointless to change anything if they weren't going change things like power balance.

Personally, 3.5 art was worse, all that "dungeon punk" look, suits made out of a thousand leather belts... hideous, hideous...

What "dungeon punk"? Did I miss some releases somewhere?

 

[Fifth Element]

It wasn't created to replace 3.5, rather to keep 3.5 as a current system (to keep 3.5 related hardcovers on the shelves - you have noticed that you can't buy 3.5 books new anymore, right?)

The point is, if the intent was merely to keep 3.5 in print, they could have done so without making any changes to the system, thanks to the OGL. But they did make changes, and made a big deal about the changes, so clearly the changes were an important factor as well.