Pathfinder 1E PPP (Post Pathfinder Poll)

[UltimaRatio]

The "Alpha" Pathfinder RPG is 3.5 with a band-aid. I've found too many flaws in 3.5 to even consider playing Pathfinder over D&D.

QFTJATAW.

The move to a per-encounter system in ToB led me to include ToB in my "core only" games. It was that much of an improvement over what came before.

And now you tell me we have an entire system based and balanced around this? Where do I sign over my soul, again?

 

[Keefe the Thief]

I already own 3rd edition. I´m not going to buy it again.

 

[jeffh]

I'm not voting one way or another. There are two reasons for this.

First, it's way too early to answer reliably, especially on the Pathfinder side. We've got an alpha playtest document (and almost no time so far to digest it) that isn't even complete on the one side and a motley assortment of tidbits which, though close to final, still don't have enough context to really evaluate outside the special case of first-level play on the other. If you're making final decisions based on that, well, go ahead, but I don't think that's particularly wise.

Second and more importantly, though, you present the options of Pathfinder and 4E as though they were mutually exclusive, when my best guess at this point would be that I'll give both a serious look. So not only can I not be entirely sure of my choice, but you don't even offer the choice I'm most leaning toward.

I realize there's nothing scientific about any ENWorld poll in the first place, but there can be better and worse ones even so, and it's been a while since I mentioned my extreme impatience with really poorly thought out ones. It's really not that hard to offer options that

• Are all answering the same question! (Corollary: Make sure the poll is asking one question in the first place, not two or more)
• Cover all the possible (or reasonable) answers, without consigning any serious position to the "other" box
• Are mutually exclusive (unless you give the option of making more than one choice)
• Draw distinctions that actually mean something

Why can so few people seem to get all of these things right? (EDIT: This isn't one of the worst I've seen by any means, this last bit is more of a general rant.)

 

[Maggan]

Edit 2: If you are going to buy both and use both (and others) equally please vote for noe of the above.

So "none of the above it is". Especially the "others". For a more accurate answer:

"None of the above. I'll buy and play 4e, follow the development of the Pathfinder RPG, while playing 3.5, Vampire, WH40kRP, WFRP and some homebrews."

/M

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Because internet polls of fan communities that compose less than 5% of the total consumer base are always representative of overall market trends! Or wait. No. No, they're not.

Especially not in the 4E forum. Most posting and "polling" here are definitely pro 4E by now. The General Discussion forum seems to have this a little reserved, judging from the last poll regarding 3.5 / 4E split.

The "Alpha" Pathfinder RPG is 3.5 with a band-aid. I've found too many flaws in 3.5 to even consider playing Pathfinder over D&D.

It's a shame, really -- the Paizo guys do excellent work, and I'm really psyched about what Clark and Necromancer are getting set to do.

My hope is that over time, a new RPG / D&D Design star is born - maybe Jason Buhlmann (that was his name?) will be the 5E Mike Mearls/Monte Cook. We'll see.

 

[mach1.9pants]

Why can so few people seem to get all of these things right?

I am terribly sorry, I'll ask for your help next time then it'll be great!

(EDIT: This isn't one of the worst I've seen by any means, this last bit is more of a general rant.)

Thank you, now I can sleep sound at night

 

[helium3]

Because internet polls of fan communities that compose less than 5% of the total consumer base are always representative of overall market trends! Or wait. No. No, they're not.

*insert my response post where I mention Snakes on a Plane*

 

[helium3]

Especially not in the 4E forum. Most posting and "polling" here are definitely pro 4E by now. The General Discussion forum seems to have this a little reserved, judging from the last poll regarding 3.5 / 4E split.

And yet the proud minority will soldier on. Carrying the torch of Grognardism forward into the future, that it may be given to Grognards not yet born, that they too can practice their inalienable right to scoff, condescend and look askance.

 

[Lord Sessadore]

While a number of the changes that are in their first version of the PF rules appeal to me a fair bit, it's still (as others have noted before) just 3.5 with a band-aid. At least to me.

I'm considering incorporating the PFRPG stuff into my currently running 3.5 campaign, but that would be a bit of a pain. In any case, I still plan to switch to 4e when it comes out, so the Pathfinder stuff would really be no more than a band-aid for my game.

That said, it would be very, very interesting to see whether they can make a go of this. A branch-off RPG from D&D would be interesting, especially for those who don't like the direction 4e is going (which isn't me, but I'm not everyone).

 

[Lord Sessadore]

And yet the proud minority will soldier on. Carrying the torch of Grognardism forward into the future, that it may be given to Grognards not yet born, that they too can practice their inalienable right to scoff, condescend and look askance.

Haha! Not that I have anything against grognards, but I find it hard to not laugh at a good poke