Pathfinder 1E Opinions on Pathfinder

[Scribble]

So when a person new to 4e sees that a dragon can only go roar, stomp, crush, chomp - what are they to think?

Probably the same thing we all thought the first time we saw a Dragon in an RPG... "COOOOOOOL A DRAGON!!!!"

Give the poor newbie some imaginative credit will ya?

He'll probably see the dragon, see how it works in the game, and then decide it can do other stuff because he's probably a fan of fantasy, and has seen dragons before, and wants them to do other stuff too because, well... it's cool.

(Not to mention the fact that as the newbie gets more and more into this fun new game he's found he's probably going to start reaching out to other sources like Dragon, and the Draconomicon, and anything else that has stuff for his newfound fun... )


He probably WON'T log on to message boards and complain about how various parts of the game are destroying his ability to imagine stuff... That's for us old guys to argue about. (He's probably making fun of us right now like I used to when I read the forum column in Dragon... "These people are weirdos... they need to chill out..."

 

[Aus_Snow]

Give the poor newbie some imaginative credit will ya?

Right on schedule. . .

Yeah, anyway. They are as they are. People can, and some will change them. Uh huh. Right. But it doesn't change what they are, as presented.

So many people running 4e going on about how 4e is such a breeze to run as is, you don't need to do anything else to it, and so on. You'd think it wouldn't be too painful to acknowledge that many do exactly that. . .

But no, of course not. 4e's maidenhood is under siege once again. Or something. So, by any means possible, diversion or obfuscation included, certain bare facts must be shut down. This instant!

Feh.

 

[Scribble]

Right on schedule. . .

Yeah, anyway. They are as they are. People can, and some will change them. Uh huh. Right. But it doesn't change what they are, as presented.

So many people running 4e going on about how 4e is such a breeze to run as is, you don't need to do anything else to it, and so on. You'd think it wouldn't be too painful to acknowledge that many do exactly that. . .

But no, of course not. 4e's maidenhood is under siege once again. Or something. So, by any means possible, diversion or obfuscation included, certain bare facts must be shut down. This instant!

Feh.

I'd actually say this about just about any game... so please don't make this an edition war... because I'm not interested. I've said the same thing about basic D&D, and various other game systems as well, so again please don't put words in my mouth.

We old dudes are the ones arguing about how this and that random rule will do this and that to the "poor newbie."

I think it's BS- what will happen to the newbie will be exactly what happened with all of us as we started gaming. We found a style of playing that we found most fun, and then we got set in that way, and started arguing with everyone else about how the rules should work and will effect the next poor newbie.

When in reality the poor newbie is out there thinking we're freakin weirdos spending our time arguing pointless stuff like this on a message board. (This is exactly what I thought when I read those forum pages in Dragon. And now I AM one of those guys... ahhh life.)

 

[catsclaw227]

Muh? How is it *unfair* to compare the Adult Blue Dragon (CR 13) from the Pathfinder Bestiary with the Adult Blue Dragon (Level 13, I believe?) from the 4e Monster Manual. . . in any way, shape or form? I mean, really.

And yeah, I'm sure the fluff in however many additional, non-core splatbooks is superb. Great. But where does that place those guys who just buy the core books, like even if they buy every set of core (PHB !, II, III, and so on, for all three) - what does the MM tell them about dragons and what they can do? Hm, I think I'll stick with my previous assessment, thanks.

I only mentioned it because for the game Dungeons & Dragons, an RPG with a long history of supplements and support books, it makes sense that there will be one for Dragons (it is in the name of the game) that supports the base MM1 descriptions and enhances flavor for those that want it. The Draconomicons (and Open Grave, MotP, etc) are about adding the fluff to the existing crunch from other books and then adding a few more options.

It's a 4e paradigm that some may like, others don't. And it's not JUST a money grab (though ongoing revenue is important to businesses ) because it would be ludicrous to try to stuff all that into a single book. I don't want my MM to be bereft of some monsters because they needed to add more fluff text to other monsters.

YMMV, of course, as there are those that would rather have it all in one book. To each their own, I suppose.

If you could imagine putting all the content from Draco1 and Draco2 in the MM, the page count would be roughly 880 pages.

 

[carmachu]

See, I don't believe this is true. I paid close attention to the edition switch, and I didn't see any hostile or even "antagonistic" action on WotC's part towards its own fans. I certainly saw some fans react as though antagonistic action had been taken, but that doesn't mean their reaction was justified. As I've pointed out before, this isn't exactly a community that's known for being able to react appropriately to industry news and changes. If WotC "set themselves up" for this in any way, it was simply by choosing to continue to make the tabletop roleplaying community their customer base.

What YOU believe is irrelevant. Judging by, for example, the cancellation of the magazines and teh fans outrage, and WOTC's lack of having something ready(read, the only thing they really said was they had something REALLY REALLY cool coming), yes it was.

The fact they had to trot folks out to help cool the fires, shows it. Its just one example of many. OGL/GSL debacle anyone?

Further, your still doing it. Your blaming the customers for "not understanding" "or reacting in a bad way". Thats not the failure of the customers. Thats the failure of teh company trying to sell its product. Failure to meet their target audience expectations and understand what they want. Its a failure to deliver.

Paizo, whether you like them or not, whether you use them or not, had the right way. Magzines canceled? Gee well hey here's a list of options, in cluding a new product for you to transition.

Wotc? Had something really really cool coming. Eventually. Sometime.

Speaking of products coming, how's that table top coming, what 2-3 years after it was suppose to arrive at launch?

 

[Aus_Snow]

I'd actually say this about just about any game... so please don't make this an edition war... because I'm not interested. I've said the same thing about basic D&D, and various other game systems as well, so again please don't put words in my mouth.

My bad. I'm sorry, I really did go over the top in my reaction there. For what it's worth, I apologise. I already said what I said, but - and this might seem unlikely, I know - I don't actually want an edition war either. Seriously. And I've nothing against you personally. Or anyone who plays games I don't play. Or those who like them. Or hey, love them and enthuse about them online! Or do with them as they wish, how they want to. Whatever and however the hey!

When in reality the poor newbie is out there thinking we're freakin weirdos spending our time arguing pointless stuff like this on a message board. (This is exactly what I thought when I read those forum pages in Dragon. And now I AM one of those guys... ahhh life.)

Hehe, you could be right there. And I'll try my best not to make those impressions any worse. If possible.

It's a 4e paradigm that some may like, others don't. And it's not JUST a money grab (though ongoing revenue is important to businesses ) because it would be ludicrous to try to stuff all that into a single book. I don't want my MM to be bereft of some monsters because they needed to add more fluff text to other monsters.

Fair enough too. And btw, I'm not - and I wasn't - saying anything about a money grab. Most RPG companies do that to some extent, IMO, so I'm hardly going to pick on WotC for that! Hm, and they're by no means the worst offender. . . again, IMO.

YMMV, of course, as there are those that would rather have it all in one book. To each their own, I suppose.

If you could imagine putting all the content from Draco1 and Draco2 in the MM, the page count would be roughly 880 pages.

Yeah, that's it really. I don't have any issue with the way 4e is set out, or packaged off, and so on. It's just not for me. That's all. And again, sorry for um, ranting a bit.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The 4e stat block is cutting out everything that won't work in the situation that calls for a stat block 99% of the time- A fight.

It's fine to have a load of abilities that inspire the DM attached to a monster, but if the stat block is going to most commonly be referred to while the creature is in a fight then those "extra" abilities will only serve to hamper the DM durring the game.

I fail to see how illusions, weather, and invisibility are irrelevant in combat.

In fact, quite the opposite, I see them being very key in combat. And part of what makes the fight with the adult blue dragon different from a fight with, I dunno, Dire Pikachu, who I bet can also do some things with lightning.

The D&D game has millions of monsters. Your imagination has at least a few more where those came from. Even the current edition is probably over 1,000 by now. Why should I bother using an adult blue dragon, out of all of them?

4e doesn't really give me a reason. It is an electricity lizard. It is a dire pikachu. I can do almost the same thing by doing a find-replace for "fire" to "electricity" in the Red Dragon entry. There'd be some subtle differences, but no one will notice them except the DM. You could've just included a "dragon" statblock with fear and frenzy and claws and bites and then given me an menu of 5 different energy effects to slap on as I please. It's all the same dire pokemon.

Pathfinder gives me a reason, because it sets up the blue dragon as a Mirage Dragon. It is a unique challenge, one that has a special nature of its own that is not easily replicated by any other monster. It is a deceptive dragon who forces enemies to waste time and effort attacking nothingness, arrogantly invisible just beyond their reach, taunting them in the voices of various NPC's the party was supposed to rescue (that it also used to lure them here). It destroys their water spitefully before it flees, letting the desert slowly kill them. It darts ahead of static-laden sandstorms, blending with the sky. PF's dragon is almost a full encounter. Slap it on a map, and I'm good to go. 4e's dragon is just a block o' numbers. Necessary, yes, but insufficient. I have no context, and no reason to use it. It could be hiding somewhere in the desert, or it could be the 4e version of Orc and Pie. For all it's loathed complexity and cross-referencing, PF's dragon is sufficient (even if it is not the most elegant). It has context, and it stands out from its surroundings.

 

[Dannager]

I fail to see how illusions, weather, and invisibility are irrelevant in combat.

No one said they were.

In fact, illusions are so common in 4e monster stat blocks, they have their own keyword.

Weather-based zone effects show up in many monsters.

Many lurkers have ways of turning invisible during combat.

They just didn't give the blue dragon any of these things.

If you feel your blue dragon is missing them, just find an ability that matches what you're trying to do, and drop it into the blue dragon's stat block.

 

[dm4hire]

Um this thread is supposed to be about pathfinder right?

How about those adventures? Is the pathfinder srd as good as the 3.5 hypertext srd?

I'll answer your questions. I just finished Crypt of the Everflame two weeks ago with my group. They enjoyed it and we started up Masks of the Living God. Both are part of a three mod arch written by Jason Bulmahn and are great introductory modules. Paizo's adventures are well written IMO whether they are independent mods or part of the AP stories. I've read through the first two parts of Council of Thieves, but probably won't run them for my group. I want my group to learn the world so running an AP is out since they tend to focus on specific regions. If you want to having everything in a set area then APs are the route to go. Hodge Podge campaigning with different stories then go with the Pathfinder mods or the older Gamemastery ones.

There are three versions of the Pathfinder SRD available as well as a hyperlinked PDF. There's the one that Paizo has put up as well as the one mentioned here. The third one escapes me right now but if you do some searching on Paizo's boards you'll find it. As for how they compare with the hyperlinked 3.5 SRD I'd say they're about the same if not better depending on your tastes and which one you end up using. Hope that answers your question.

 

[Dannager]

Further, your still doing it. Your blaming the customers for "not understanding" "or reacting in a bad way". Thats not the failure of the customers. Thats the failure of teh company trying to sell its product. Failure to meet their target audience expectations and understand what they want. Its a failure to deliver.

Yes, as I already pointed out, WotC is guilty of trying to cater to the tabletop roleplaying game fanbase. That we are so hard to please that the company with the most experience in the industry can't make a decision without getting poo flung in its direction is not something that flatters us.

Paizo, whether you like them or not, whether you use them or not, had the right way. Magzines canceled? Gee well hey here's a list of options, in cluding a new product for you to transition.

Paizo got its own share of flak for its own decisions. I'm sure if its fan base were larger, the criticism it received would have also been greater.

Speaking of products coming, how's that table top coming, what 2-3 years after it was suppose to arrive at launch?

Oh no. WotC had to revise their proposed feature list for DDI. How awful.

Every company in the video game industry has done the same thing in the past. The one that really sticks out is Blizzard. They got so fed up with having to slog through the ire of their community that they ended up taking a "we're not saying anything until we're sure it's coming out" approach, and that's the same approach WotC was forced to adopt this last year. And really, the video game fan community is able to get over its frothing rage within a couple of weeks. There seem to be some people within the tabletop roleplaying community who are unable to let the issue go two years later, even though DDI is a truly excellent product package that almost everyone you'll find on here running 4e agrees is well worth the price of admission.