Pathfinder 1E Paizo Annoucement!

[Lizard]

Most 3.5 enthusiasts don't have an issue with 4E. They have an issue with WotC.

I don't.

I have issues with very specific design decisions/paradigm shifts in 4e. I think WOTC is misreading the market, to their (and the hobby's) detriment. I think once the "Ooo new shiny!" wears off, 4e will sell more poorly, over time, than 3e did year-by-year. I do not think the new players the game design is intended to attract exist in sufficient numbers to counter the old players who will, for whatever reason, not upgrade. Time and sales figures will tell.

But I have no beef with WOTC. I don't get into the "Oooh, they're big, I hate them" 20-something hipster bullcrap. I buy products, not companies. I was very happy with 3.5 and defended WOTC against charges of "greed", because the updates were clearly necessary and the game was better for them -- and besides, the SRD was free.

If WOTC published a 4e that was more in line with what I wanted -- a game that still felt like 3x but polished and enhanced -- I'd be supporting it. I don't like 4e because it kills a few too many sacred cows -- every class following the exact same power structure? Boring. Hard-coded 'roles' so that every class concept has to be pounded into one of four slots? Also boring. Different systems for characters and monsters? A throwback to 1e, and not in a good way. Simplified skill lists? Identical attack/save progressions? No non-combat (Craft, Profession, Perform) skills? All not to my taste. I do not want a party of clones, even if 'the math' works and no one ever has to feel that, for the space of one encounter, they're not the very bestest in the whole wide world. Keep the Handicapper General out of my fantasy worlds, please.

If WOTC puts out products I like/want, I will buy them. Hell, I'm buying 4e -- I want to see the whole game in full, and besides, I'm a collector. Who knows? I may even end up liking it when I see it all put together and test it in play, but I'm not really counting on it. Most of the ideas I like about it can be added to 3x more easily than the things I don't like about it can be fixed.

 

[Dausuul]

The rules should encourage people to think in character. In my ideal gaming system, whenever you face a decision, you think, "I'm Throg the Barbarian. What do I do?" and the answer to that dictates your action.

And rules can encourage that. One (but far from the only) way to do so is with XP awards for good roleplaying, which push people to get into the habit of playing their characters' personality traits. I'm not saying 4E should use this specific mechanic, but it's a good jumping-off point.

On the other hand, when you spend your time thinking about the game as an abstract tactical scenario, and not as an approximation to a pretend reality, roleplaying suffers. All things considered, I believe 4E will help in this area. Yeah, there are cases where you kind of have to squint at what the rules are doing, but IMO that's more than compensated for by the drastic reduction in time spent crunching numbers.

 

[Psion]

People keep saying this. Its one of those "its like they're talking in Martian" moments for me whenever I read it. What SHOULD the rules be doing to facilitate or set up roleplaying? Is there something that previous editions did that facilitated or set up roleplaying, which 4e does not do?

Got me.

I've got my share of complaints about 4e, but this isn't one of them. 3e was pretty "hands off" in the roleplaying department, and unless there's some missing mechanic I'm not seeing in 4e, it looks pretty much the same.

The only thing that might concern me is how the supposed social conflict rules work. I'm wary of intrusive rp mechanics, but I haven't seen these yet, so don't know if they qualify.

 

[Desdichado]

So the above paragraph says what, then?

I'm very confused. It says what it says. You quoted it, you read it.

It does not, however, say what you say it says. You've made up something completely different from what it says and are claiming that that's what it says.

I have no idea where you're coming from here.

 

[Aeson]

Hell Yeah!!!!
Fight that 800 pound gorilla! You Can Do IT!

As a long time suscriber to Dragon magazine. You already have my loyalty Piazo, and since I'm not switching to 4e and likely not buying from WoTC in the future looks like you can count on the about $400 a year I spent with them being thrown at your quality products instead.

I haven't read all of the thread yet. I just wanted to say QFMFT!

I look forward to this and hope it does well.

A prediction of my own. 4E will fail and Paizo will buy the brand off of Hasbro.

 

[Wormwood]

A prediction of my own. 4E will fail and Paizo will buy the brand off of Hasbro.

I'd like a pony.

 

[billd91]

So how exactly does addressing the issues in 3.5 going to ensure backwards capability? How do you make a new game when your fans are convinced nothing needs to change, or at least unable to agree. How much can you change before your no longer 3.5+ but 4.0 -

I'm not sure that people sticking with 3.5 think nothing needs to change. There's a lot of skepticism at the specific changes and the magnitude of changes in 4e but that's a far cry from the system being perfect.

 

[Roman]

Has anybody made a PDF character sheet using these rules yet? If so, I would appreciate a download!

 

[Primal]

You're not speaking for me, my group, or most "3.5 diehards" I associate with. Most of us are some mix of disappointed with 4e or just don't see the point of moving on to a new edition.

Also heartily seconded.

EDIT: My group has been playing since BD&D, and we've always embraced every new edition of the game. This is the first time that the whole group -- based on what we've seen of the rules so far (which is, in fact, quite a lot if you count the "preview" books and all the articles) -- has voted against edition change. Yesterday I phoned everyone and asked them to download the Pathfinder Alpha Rules, and after reading them, they were excited to test them. So you could say that the Pathfinder RPG, despite being still at the playtesting/preview stage, seems to cater to our tastes (mechanically and thematically) a lot better than 4E.

Besides, I've got plenty of 3E material and unused ideas left -- probably enough to keep my campaigns running for another 8 years or so. And I don't care if the system will be supported or not -- I've always written my own adventures and I *was* getting tired of those splat books anyway.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

You think so?

Just skimmed the rules.

It's 3.5 with a band-aid and fresh coat of paint. Do not want.

Despite my 4E preorder, I still do like the 3.5 rules. I've got a ton of adventures and sourcebooks I've barely looked at, and I will hopefully get through all of them in time. I'm going to be one of those guys who plays 3E or 4E as it suits the group. However, I expect that if I play 3E, I'll use the Pathfinder rules from now on. They're a significant improvement in places, and add a lot of nice flavour throughout.