Pathfinder OGL/3.5 RPG system from Paizo

[TheAuldGrump]

Congratulations! You've just exactly repeated the statements that people made eight and nine years ago about 2nd edition and 3e. Exactly, including the profanity, insulting comment about 11 year olds, obvious comment about a corporation needing to actually earn a profit, and unqualified statement about the new game being over-simplified. The only thing you're missing is a rant about how it's dumbing down the game to have armor class count up instead of down.

Incidentally, we have 2,575 members who were 11 or younger when 3e was launched. Do you think it's bad for the industry and the game that they're playing? Do you think it's a bad idea to recruit younger players?

I think people fall into this trap that says "just because the game isn't the same as what I'm playing right now, it's evil-bad-fun and should have never have been made." Whether I love 4e or hate it, I have a lot of trouble buying into that line of thought. I think it's a fine thing that Paizo is helping offer people an alternative to 4e, but that doesn't make their game perfect, either.

Hmm, though I will note that my own response, as a sometime 2ed player, to what I had heard about 3.0 was very much positive. 3e did a very good job of piquing my interest, and some of the most 'encouraging' notes, to my mind, were many of the ones posted as negatives. Bad reviews can bring up points as well as good ones. (The selling points to me was a single consistent die mechanic, and the removal of THAC0.)

Another point is that I was pretty much done with 2ed before 3e was on the horizon - something that I cannot say about 3e, I still play it, and my interest has not noticeably flagged. As a result I am unwilling to set aside the investment of time and money I have made to the older system (And yes, I realize that they can be considered sunk funds - that the money has been spent, whether or not I also invest in 4e.)

I may well pick up 3P, while I consider it unlikely that I will do so with 4e. 4e sounds like it might be a good game for casual play, but it just does not ring my bells. This is the first time that I have not felt that a newer edition of D&D was an improvement over the previous edition, and the first time, aside from OD&D, that an edition has appeared before I stopped playing the older edition.

The Auld Grump, about 11 when OD&D came out....

 

[occam]

I don't remember too many threads/posts asking or calling for 4.0 before we all found out about it, do you?

Yeah, actually, I do.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

I don't at all. but then I like what I am seeing with pathfinder so it's all good.

 

[BryonD]

Yeah, actually, I do.

There is a big difference between threads about "when do you think there will be a 4e"? and threads calling for 4e. I remember lots of talk about 4e. And the highly predominant tone of thread after thread was: NOT YET

I recall this clearly because I was generally on the "go for it" side. I wasn't calling for them to do it right away, but I was ready to see a new take or keep plugging 3E, either way. Of course, I assumed that 4e would expand on the advances made by 3E and therefore there would be a strong chance it would appeal to me.

But I was consistently in the minority of people who were not opposed to it happening.

 

[Voadam]

I don't remember too many threads/posts asking or calling for 4.0 before we all found out about it, do you?

I remember a lot of threads of people saying they were done with 3e, that it was too much of a pain to prep, or run combats in, or handle high level gaming, or too superheroic for them, or not enough cool action options, that its grapple system was frustrating, that it encouraged 15 minute nova days, that it put too much focus on builds, that dying was too easy, that raising dead was too easy, that multiclassing was wonky, that vancian daily resource management was not fun, that D&D cosmology was esoterically wierd, that rogues felt useless half the time, etc.

I remember a bunch of threads of people saying they were done with 3e or burnt out on it for the moment and looking for alternative games to play (with suggestions such as WFRP, True20, Conan, Exalted, GURPS, Heroes, Iron Heroes, Savage Worlds, Star Wars Saga, CoC, etc.)

 

[SavageRobby]

I know any number of folks that left 3x because of its over-complexity as a system. My group did, and moved to something else. While that isn't an explicit call for 4e, it was most definitely saying "3x isn't right for us".

Of course, I don't think 4e is going to be right for us, either. I'm unimpressed with what I've seen so far (other systems do what its trying to do better), and it looks like the complexity level isn't decreased so much as shifted.

 

[BryonD]

that dying was too easy, that raising dead was too easy,

So, you think these particular people are going to like a game with mechanics that state: "Once a day, when you die... "?

 

[Voadam]

So, you think these particular people are going to like a game with mechanics that state: "Once a day, when you die... "?

Not all people who were through with 3e and looking for an alternate game will like what WotC came up with for 4e.

People who thought that 3e was too magically superheroic, for instance, might not like 4e with 1st level teleporting eladrin.

But I'm not familiar with your reference. What mechanic says "Once a day, when you die..."

 

[Darrin Drader]

But I'm not familiar with your reference. What mechanic says "Once a day, when you die..."

One of the playtesters reported that some epic level powers start with that wording.

 

[BryonD]

Not all people who were through with 3e and looking for an alternate game will like what WotC came up with for 4e.

People who thought that 3e was too magically superheroic, for instance, might not like 4e with 1st level teleporting eladrin.

I agree.

But I'm not familiar with your reference. What mechanic says "Once a day, when you die..."

It has been reference as typical of the epic tier.