Pathfinder 1E D&D4 and Pathfinder can coexist

[Joe Sala]

So here we go again...

But I can see another major motivation for attacking the other side is fear. Fear that if the other one is successful, the game I'm publicly supporting will disappear (and I'll become somehow a looser?).

About the ninjas... let me lock the front door.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

You know what's funny? The only thing the whole WOTCPaizo split has me worried about is that if Wizards decides to revisit Greyhawk in the future, they won't ask Eric Mona to help write it.

I don't think that things between Paizo und WotC are that bitter. Of course, the problem might be that he might be so busy with Paizo & Pathfinder that he doesn't have time for the project.

We'll see...

 

[Sonny]

I don't think that things between Paizo und WotC are that bitter. Of course, the problem might be that he might be so busy with Paizo & Pathfinder that he doesn't have time for the project.

We'll see...

I would hope not. I consider his Greyhawk work some of the best he's done. And that's saying a lot considering how awesome a writer he is.

 

[DaveMage]

I get why their was so much acrimony when it looked like 4E was going to leave a lot of 3.5 fans without any support, but I seriously don't get why 3.5 fans would still be grinding an axe now that Pathfinder has come to rescue the game.

Speaking as a 3.5 fan, the only thing left that annoys me are insults to Paizo (because they are doing Pathfinder) or over-the-top disparagement of 3.5.

Because you're right - 3.5 fans have Pathfinder now. (So we've got that going for us...which is nice.)

I have no problem with 4e-players that love the game and like to talk about it. It's not my style, but it certainly is the style a lot of people want to play.

 

[Knightfall]

I agree with the OP.

While 4th Edition isn't my type of game, I don't want it to fail or for WotC to go belly up. That would be a horrible blow to the industry.

I really like the direction of Pathfinder, so I'll be supporting that product line for the most part, but I might take a look at some 4e books. The new Realms campaign book sounds like it might be an interesting read and I'll definitely be taking a close look at the new Manual of the Planes.

I'm not likely to ever run a 4e campaign but I could see myself playing in one; however, I have to say "just not right now."

 

[Greg K]

Well, personally, I think both can coexist. However, I also think that WOTC should allow 3pp to use the d20 logo for existing 3e products and support both 3e and 4e (even if it means producing seperate 3e and 4e products). Then again, I am not impressed with either 4e or Pathfinder (based on the Alpha versions) Each has a few changes that I like, but each has enough changes/additions that I have no interest to run or play them.

 

[Greg K]

Because you're right - 3.5 fans have Pathfinder now. (So we've got that going for us...which is nice.)

I have no problem with 4e-players that love the game and like to talk about it. It's not my style, but it certainly is the style a lot of people want to play.

Actually, only those 3.5 fans liking the Pathfinder changes have Pathfinder. I like 3.5 (which admittedly has some problems) and dislike 4e (which does a have a few changes that I had wanted to see for 3e). However, as with 4e, I find myself disliking more of the Pathfinder modifications than the few changes I do like- to the point that I have no interest in running or playing the Pathfinder version (based upon the Alpha's). It's not a slam againt Paizo, but a personal dislike for their overall approach to fixing 3e.

 

[DaveMage]

Actually, only those 3.5 fans liking the Pathfinder changes have Pathfinder. I like 3.5 (which admittedly has some problems) and dislike 4e (which does a have a few changes that I had wanted to see for 3e). However, as with 4e, I find myself disliking more of the Pathfinder modifications than the few changes I do like- to the point that I have no interest in running or playing the Pathfinder version (based upon the Alpha's). It's not a slam againt Paizo, but a personal dislike for their overall approach to fixing 3e.

But, in theory, you shouldn't need the Pathfinder RPG to run the Pathfinder adventures - even when they start using the rules from the Pathfinder RPG.

I'm planning on using Pathfinder as an "Unearthed Arcana 2" and taking what I like and ignoring the rest.

 

[Darrin Drader]

But, in theory, you shouldn't need the Pathfinder RPG to run the Pathfinder adventures - even when they start using the rules from the Pathfinder RPG.

I'm planning on using Pathfinder as an "Unearthed Arcana 2" and taking what I like and ignoring the rest.

I ran the alpha at a con a couple weekends ago, and I used it as printed with no modifications. It went very well. It was definitely smoother than 3.5.

Players particularly enjoyed the way turning works and the guy who was playing the fighter loved the new Cleave and Great Cleave. The only one who got the shaft was the wizard, and that was because the rogue announced that he was going to attack him with the spear he picked up from a dead kobold. He rolled the dice after he said it, so I ruled that he effectively started combat and that the other character was not expecting it, so he got a surprise round. His roll was a natural 20, then he proceeded to confirm it. So, critical spear damage and sneak attack damage and the wizard was about done for. While the other players at the table were shaking their heads sadly at this display, the wizard decided to get even by dropping a fireball on the rogue. The rogue evaded, but the wizard was accidentally within range of the blast.

Scratch one wizard, but I blame that on player incompetence rather than any problem with the rules.

 

[Greg K]

But, in theory, you shouldn't need the Pathfinder RPG to run the Pathfinder adventures - even when they start using the rules from the Pathfinder RPG.

I'm planning on using Pathfinder as an "Unearthed Arcana 2" and taking what I like and ignoring the rest.

That is what I thought. However, I have concern after seeing how the classes are increased in power and keep hearing
a) how it was done to keep them on par with classes from WOTC later books (which I don't use and my preference would have been to bring down the spellcasters).

b) pathfinder adventures are much harder on the core classes, because they are designed to take account the power creep from WOTC supplements. I don't know if this is true or not as I don't run adventure paths, but I have seen plenty of discussion on this issue.