Pathfinder OGL/3.5 RPG system from Paizo

[BadMojo]

My luv of Paizo knows no bounds!

Yeah, I'm really impressed by this.

Not for lack of trying, I'm really not digging what I'm seeing from 4E. It's nice to have an alternative that fixes some of the wacky stuff from 3.5E but keeps, IMO, a lot of the good stuff.

I may try to run Red Hand of Doom using this.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

But do you honestly believe that they will eat into D&D market share when they are releasing a 3.5 d20 knock-off that doesn't even come out until a year after the release of 4e?

I'm not sure why it's important to you, Paizo, or anybody else whether Pathfinder eats into the market share of D&D or not.

If I thought it was relevant I might argue with you, but I'm happy to concede the point if you'll move on. Consider the point made.

Not for lack of trying, I'm really not digging what I'm seeing from 4E. It's nice to have an alternative that fixes some of the wacky stuff from 3.5E but keeps, IMO, a lot of the good stuff.

There is a non-zero number of folks with exactly that attitude. WotC doesn't want them, and doesn't need them. Paizo thinks there's enough of them to make it worthwhile to cater to them, and Paizo can still make products for 4e.

So... I guess we're done here?

 

[Ourph]

That's why it's an open playtest. If the Alpha pushes the rules too far away from what the audience wants, we'll change it.

--Erik

That's a nice idea in theory, but won't the people who like 3.5 the way it is, who want the APs to stay 3.5 compatible, still be playing their 3.5 game with their 3.5 rulebooks (or Arcana Evolved with their AE rulebooks or Iron Heroes with their IH rulebooks, etc.) during the playtest period - and thus, not contributing to the playtest? Why would I put in the time and effort to playtest the game and struggle to keep Pathfinder as close to D&D 3.5 as possible when I've already got D&D 3.5, or Arcana Evolved or Iron Heroes or True20, etc. and am perfectly happy with it and just want more APs that I can use with my game?

It just seems to me like you'll be self-selecting for people who WANT Pathfinder to diverge from the D&D 3.5 rules with the open playtest and that the results won't necessarily tell you anything about the people who just want the APs to stay as they are.

 

[joela]

Fantasy Craft?

Paizo will probably do quite alright for themselves. I expect them to dominate the d20 OGL market, although Crafty Games upcoming Fantasy Craft may have something to say about that.

Fantasy Craft? Linky...?

 

[BadMojo]

There is a non-zero number of folks with exactly that attitude. WotC doesn't want them, and doesn't need them. Paizo thinks there's enough of them to make it worthwhile to cater to them, and Paizo can still make products for 4e.

So... I guess we're done here?

Yeah, I suppose we are. I don't have much to say other than, "I like it."

I don't have any groundless speculation as to Paizo's success or lack thereof with this, so I'm just posting about my own pleasure at seeing this out there as an option.

As a community (EnWorld), I'm sure we'll continue baseless speculation on this bit of news for many days to come.

 

[Treebore]

That's a nice idea in theory, but won't the people who like 3.5 the way it is, who want the APs to stay 3.5 compatible, still be playing their 3.5 game with their 3.5 rulebooks (or Arcana Evolved with their AE rulebooks or Iron Heroes with their IH rulebooks, etc.) during the playtest period - and thus, not contributing to the playtest? Why would I put in the time and effort to playtest the game and struggle to keep Pathfinder as close to D&D 3.5 as possible when I've already got D&D 3.5, or Arcana Evolved or Iron Heroes or True20, etc. and am perfectly happy with it and just want more APs that I can use with my game?

It just seems to me like you'll be self-selecting for people who WANT Pathfinder to diverge from the D&D 3.5 rules with the open playtest and that the results won't necessarily tell you anything about the people who just want the APs to stay as they are.

Very good point.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Yeah, I suppose we are. I don't have much to say other than, "I like it."

Sorry Mojo: in retrospect my post looked hostile to you. I was quoting you by way of rebuttal to Dragonblade.

 

[Wicht]

That's a nice idea in theory, but won't the people who like 3.5 the way it is, who want the APs to stay 3.5 compatible, still be playing their 3.5 game with their 3.5 rulebooks (or Arcana Evolved with their AE rulebooks or Iron Heroes with their IH rulebooks, etc.) during the playtest period - and thus, not contributing to the playtest? Why would I put in the time and effort to playtest the game and struggle to keep Pathfinder as close to D&D 3.5 as possible when I've already got D&D 3.5, or Arcana Evolved or Iron Heroes or True20, etc. and am perfectly happy with it and just want more APs that I can use with my game?

It just seems to me like you'll be self-selecting for people who WANT Pathfinder to diverge from the D&D 3.5 rules with the open playtest and that the results won't necessarily tell you anything about the people who just want the APs to stay as they are.

Here's one who likes 3.0-3.5 well enough who will be playtesting the new rules. Some of them look pretty promising. There are very few people who don't think 3.5 can't be improved. But thinking 3.5 can be improved is not the same as thinking 4.0 holds the answers.

 

[BadMojo]

Sorry Mojo: in retrospect my post looked hostile to you. I was quoting you by way of rebuttal to Dragonblade.

No problem. I wasn't offended or anything like that. I definitely agree with your point.

I'm sure this thread will go on forever. I only wish there was less talk about WotC Vs. Paizo Deathmatch and more talk about ya know, the product itself...

 

[Cthulhudrew]

Nah, they should be Pragon and Pungeon. Or go Gygax style and call them Drajon and Dunjeon

Not sure about Pungeon. It stinks. (Ha! Punny!)

How about Paizon?