Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Majoru Oakheart" data-source="post: 6218424" data-attributes="member: 5143">See, the problem is that Sour Grapes is precisely what created Pathfinder in the first place.  I was there in the lobby of the hotel at D&D Experience when Jason was on the phone with people back at Paizo after having tried 4e D&D for the first time.  I was just going to grab some food but I recognized him due to my experience with Living Greyhawk and stopped for a second to see what he was up to.  I didn't mean to overhear, but the conversation was pretty much about how he didn't like 4e at all.  I was extremely disappointed as I was a beta tester of 4e, already recruited to be an admin for Living Forgotten Realms, was at the convention running 4e before it even came out for people.  I was really hoping that Jason might be getting back in to help us steward in a new campaign and edition.  I stopped dead in my tracks when I heard and was curious about his whole opinion.He proceeded to basically say that after one session of 4e, he hated everything about it and had no idea what they should do about that.  I walked away disappointed that the game I was looking forward to was being trashed by someone I looked up to....especially after apparently so little experience with it.  The books weren't even out and he was writing it off.A couple of days later when Paizo announced that they were creating a whole new game that was based off the rules to 3.5e but with some houserules to fix the problems they had with it...I realized that I might have overheard what was basically the moment that Paizo decided to go ahead with their plans.It seems to me that the entire impetus for Pathfinder was a snap decision over one bad play experience.  I personally believe that Pathfinder has caused way more damage to the hobby than anything else.  In the past, when a new edition came out there were basically 4 choices: Continue playing with outdated rules out of principle, switch to a new game system, ride the wave of people switching to the new edition while ignoring the stuff about it you didn't like, or stop playing altogether.  Paizo added a 5th option: Continue playing the same edition but with a different name and company with new books coming out.In the past every option except riding the wave forward was a bad one.  Stick with the same edition and wind up with no one to play with, switch to a lesser popular system and have the same problem, stop playing and you don't get to play at all.  Most people who didn't like 3e still switched to it...because there were no other good options.  And eventually they grew to like it.The problem with the switch to 4e is that no one had time to get used to it.  Even before the game came out there was the option to bypass it entirely created by a well known company who pretty much said "We hate 4e so much that we can't support it in good conscience."  Which, I believe, led to the situation we have now.So, in answer to the original question, I believe that Paizo is too intentionally disruptive to be the steward of the hobby.</blockquote>

Verification