Pathfinder 1E [Pathfinder] Planning on switching to Pathfinder?

If my gaming group were willing to invest in their own set of books, I would switch to Pathfinder from 4E, albeit reluctantly.

I say that not because I don't like Pathfinder, but currently, the tools for GMs that are available with the D&D Insider subscription make game prep an absolute breeze for me. As I often don't know who is going to show up to my games, or how many people I'll have (and whether or not I'll even be able to run a D&D game), I despise spending hours and hours prepping for a game that doesn't happen.

Of course, if I ran Pathfinder, I would use one of the adventure paths; maybe Savage Tides or one of the new ones they've been publishing, like Legacy of Fire, so that would help with the game prep.

But, on the other hand, trying to get my players to buy into a new system (even when I buy all of them the books, like I did with Savage Worlds), is like trying to pull an elephant's teeth with needlenose pliers.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I say that not because I don't like Pathfinder, but currently, the tools for GMs that are available with the D&D Insider subscription make game prep an absolute breeze for me. As I often don't know who is going to show up to my games, or how many people I'll have (and whether or not I'll even be able to run a D&D game), I despise spending hours and hours prepping for a game that doesn't happen.

I feel the same way too. Even without DDI, 4E takes a lot less preparation time than 3.5E.

Judging from the Pathfinder beta, it looks like it would be back to the same long hours of preparation, similar to what 3E/3.5E was like. This is very unappealing to go back to, especially after a year of playing and DM'ing 4E.
 

I won't be switching - still enjoy 3.5 too much and got way too much stuff. That's not to say that Iwon't be picking any of the Pathfinder stuff up. I'll certainly be getting the core book, and may well pcik up adventures and convert them, where they're useful. But, no, sticking with 3.5.
 

Of our three campaigns:

  • one (mine) is going from 4E to Pathfinder
  • one is sticking with 3.5 (never left)
  • one was 4E and the DM is either going Pathfinder or back to AD&D
 

My Shackled City game is almost at the end, so we'll finish it using 3.5.

Once the SCAP is finished I'm starting Paizo's Legacy of Fire. I'll run that with the Pathfinder rules.

The Second Darkness campaign I'm playing in just started with the Beta rules, and I expect we'll switch over, possibly keeping some of the beta options.

My other Shackled City game is sort of a fill in game. If we continue with it, I may switch over, or not. TBD.

I am in these games, so this is the way we are going. I think I may put together something Arabian Nights using Pathfinder for a one shot for con season next year.
 

Looking over the last year, our group had three campaigns underway :

- a 4E campaign that is currently on long term hiatus.
- a pair of Pathfinder Beta test campaigns.

I imagine that the Beta Pathfinder campaigns will switch to the final Pathfinder version of the rules, but it's possible that we'll keep using portions of the beta rules if the final has changed some things in ways we don't like.
 

No. Pathfinder just seems like a gonzo version of 3e to me. All the serious problems I had with 3e seem to have stuck around, and over the top character abilities that would make 4e blush have been grafted on. I would have rather had a system with 4e's flexible and modular mechanics and 3e's modesty.

On the other hand, Paizo is beating the crap out of Wizards of the Coast in terms of adventure design. If I'm running a pre-made adventure at all in the last year, it was a Paizo adventure. WotC is getting better, but Thunderspire Labyrinth was the only adventure I've desperately wanted to run thus far, and that was for the locale rather than the adventure.
 

On the other hand, Paizo is beating the crap out of Wizards of the Coast in terms of adventure design. If I'm running a pre-made adventure at all in the last year, it was a Paizo adventure. WotC is getting better, but Thunderspire Labyrinth was the only adventure I've desperately wanted to run thus far, and that was for the locale rather than the adventure.
Couldn't agree more. The WotC adventures (and adventures in general) have definitely been the low point of the latest version of D&D... even the supposedly "good" ones like P2 were very bland and a seemed like a collection of randomly thrown together encounters, IME.

For that reason alone, I've been sticking with 3.5. We briefly flirted with Pathfinder Beta, but found that it didn't really mesh very well with the 3.5 splatbooks. When I started my CotCT campaign we took a vote on either PF Beta only or 3.5 only (with splatbooks). The unanimous vote was for 3.5.

When that campaign finishes, I'll probably run something 4e. Either an Eberron campaign (the WotC Eberron adventures look good - not as good as Paizo's adventures, but still well ahead of the 4e fare from them so far), or a Planescape "conversion". Either that or give Pathfinder (without 3.5 splatbooks) a chance with the CoT adventure path. Haven't decided yet - we'll probably put it ot the vote again.
 

I was more thinking that my one voice would rather be trumped by the many other people who are also suggesting things for the library to buy. They aren't made of money, and must prioritize. They would, and probably should, purchase things that more people want.

It depends; if there are enough funds, *all* suggestions by patrons will likely be acquired (unless they would violate the library's collection development policy). For example, at the library I work at, we acquire about 500000 new titles per year (branches included), and out of these about 1% are suggested by patrons. Local needs are always prioritized in collection development (also to make sure we don't acquire a lot of material that will mostly gather dust on the shelves) and patrons who tell us what they want to read/watch/play/listen are signaling "This is a title that will check out" -- after all, we're developing the collection for the local community, not ourselves or to build an elitist "dream collection". This is also the reason why we have so many manga series -- teenagers and young adults are far more eager than adults in telling our library what they want to read (or, at least, manga fans are). Having said that, all libraries aim to build a comprehensive collection with diverse material. Even if hunting is the "big thing" locally, it doesn't mean the library will spend the majority of its resources on material about hunting; it will be emphasized to some degree, but any good suggestion will likely be purchased (if we only wanted to make the circulation numbers look as good as possible, the safest tactic around here would likely be to purchase thrillers and manga books only).

Naturally, if they don't have a lot of funds, or the community analysis shows there is no actual need for a RPG collection (e.g. only a couple of patrons who admit being role-players), it's likely that they won't start developing it (rather, they'll suggest getting RPGs as interlibrary loans). However, if there is a local RPG community (but who are shy about asking the librarians about RPGs), the local public library might just as well acquire less books about hunting, for example, and spend the money on RPGs.


4E would not be a bad choice either - expose new folks to the game for which they are most likely to be able to quickly and easily find the most other materials and players.

CoC... I'm not so sure there. Great game, but the Cthuloid Horror genre isn't widely recognized by people who aren't already exposed to gaming. I'd probably aim for a system that does genres that are currently pretty hot - I'd probably aim for a Supers game (Mutants and Masterminds, say). After that, something that does urban fantasy well.

It depends on a number of factors (e.g. collection development policy and local needs and whether you have Lovecraft novels in the collection or not), but I'd say CoC would be a good choice for a horror RPG; it's a classic that draws its origins from classical horror stories (which, as mentioned, are found in many libraries' collections). In general, I like systems that have been inspired by literature -- such purchases often"strenghten" the collection and circulation (as a non-native speaker, I can't find a better expression in English) and are also supported by the literacy sources the draw inspiration from (i.e. works of Lovecraft may inspire your CoC campaigns). For example, if you have 'Mouse Guard' graphic novels, it's not a bad idea to acquire the RPG, too -- maybe some patrons who read the comics will try the RPG, and vice versa? Also, it's not just new gamers I'm thinking of; maybe there are "veteran" role-players who just haven't been vocal about their needs, or after a few years these guys who started with 4E would like to try something totally different? Just as there should be games of a variety of genres (fantasy, perhaps, a bit more dominant than the others), I don't think a new collection should consist on "entry-level" systems only (besides, I personally think many indie RPGs -- at least mechanically if not thematically -- are better "entry-level" games than D&D).

Call of Cthulhu, Vampire, D&D, RuneQuest, Mutants & Masterminds, BESM, SW Saga, Serenity are probably the systems I would start a new RPG collection with... (note that I'm dropping these names as I'm going; if I *really* had to do something like this, I'd spend a bit more time in analyzing different factors). :)
 

My group already upgraded from 4E to Pathfinder Beta a few months ago.

We're switching from Beta to the final version this week.


Interestingly, my youngest player's gaming career has been WoW => 4E => Pathfinder.

Despite what doom-mongers say, I think all three types of gaming promote each other.
 

Remove ads

Top