Pathfinder is winning.

When talking about changes to D&D, the topic that always comes up is why not just play Pathfinder? Everyone seems to love it. Don't get me wrong, I love it too, but I talked to a lot of D&D players at ComicCon this year and not one of them seemed to care about the future of the game. I don't see Pathfinder as a safety net as so many of them do, I always approached it as a different, fun perspective in fantasy tabletops, but would like to see D&D come back to be number one. The saddest quote I heard all weekend:
"It really doesn't matter what Wizards is trying to do because Paizo is doing it better. Wizards gave us 3.5 but abandoned it in favor of the abomination that was 4th edition. Edition warring aside, most players felt betrayed. I'm all about trying new things in D&D, but it will probably never get past the novelty stage. Believe me, man. I speak for most players when I say Pathfinder is the way to go. Wizards is just trying to bounce back from the failure that was 4th edition."

I wasn't sure how I felt about that statement, but now I see that if we don't do our part and really pour ourselves into this, Pathfinder will become the better choice. I mean, it basically is already, as there really isn't any good, new fantasy products other than Pathfinder. I don't know about you all, but I haven't been impressed at all with the last two playtest packs. Who wants to help me resurrect 3.5???
When talking about changes to D&D, the topic that always comes up is why not just play Pathfinder?


Because there's no reason to ever even look at a pathfinder book.

I own 3.5

I own 4e.

IMO: Pathfinder is the worst of both.

Pathfinder has a great world.

I don't need the system to play in the world.
Ahh, so THIS is where I can add a sig. Remember: Killing an ancient God inside of a pyramid IS a Special Occasion, and thus, ladies should be dipping into their Special Occasions underwear drawer.
Wizards gave us 3.5 but abandoned it in favor of the abomination that was 4th edition.

What's wrong with 4e?

I quite like it.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

I picked up a Pathfinder book once at the local gaming store.  My gaming group still has never let me live it down.  I'll never make that mistake again.
I love pathfinder, but i think that wizards has learned from their mistakes and they are building a good game(i hope so), different than 4e and 3.x/pathfinder
Wizards gave us 3.5 but abandoned it in favor of the abomination that was 4th edition.

What's wrong with 4e?

I quite like it.




word. 4e is fun.
if you are really, truly happy with pathfinder or 3.5 or any other edition, then by all means, continue to play your preferred edition.

let people who want to make this edition better by playtesting it make this edition better. go back. please. enjoy. buy john brazer enterprises supplemental products for pathfinder/3.x. the market is big enough that wizards will survive without you. thank you. have a nice day.
Ok, I have to get into this one. For the longest time I was a pro 4e and anti pathfinder guy. I've played 3.5 and loved. I played 4e and loved it more. I got bored playing the same mods in LFR and the same character concepts, so I started playing Pathfinder. I've played it 3 times so far.

Each time I played it, it felt like playing 4e just with different types of characters and quicker battles. Each mod had a skill challenge. Call it what you will, but I had to roll a certain number of skill checks in order to accomplish a task for the faction and get my prestige point. Pathfinder has immediate actions and swift actions (minor actions). Pathfinder appears to me to be nothing more than 3.5 with a little 4e put in for perfection. I'm enjoying it none the less though.
Iomedae's knickers!!!!!
a mask everyone has at least two of, one they wear in public and another they wear in private.....
I dont understand all this hoopla about Pathfinder, I mean its pretty much the same as 3e, I mean really I was kinda pissed when I got the 3.5 books, I mean it was all pretty much the same thing, and now Paizo wants me to spend money buying the 3e rule books, AGAIN!? Yeah I dont think so, 4e was different, not just the same ol thing again, might be one of the reasons I like it. Im not too sure what I think of 5e at the moment, if they throw in a few more 4eisms I might be interested, but really what they (WotC) need to do is come up with a decent system and STICK WITH IT, this having to buy new Player's Handbooks every few years has got to go!
I survived Section 4 and all I got was this lousy sig Off-topic and going downhill from there
Wizards gave us 3.5 but abandoned it in favor of the abomination that was 4th edition.

What's wrong with 4e?

I quite like it.




word. 4e is fun.



Thirded.
Skeptical_Clown wrote:
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
104340961 wrote:
Pine trees didn't unanimously decide one day that leaves were gauche.
http://community.wizards.com/doctorbadwolf/blog/2012/01/10/how_we_can_help_make_dndnext_awesome
When talking about changes to D&D, the topic that always comes up is why not just play Pathfinder? Everyone seems to love it. Don't get me wrong, I love it too, but I talked to a lot of D&D players at ComicCon this year and not one of them seemed to care about the future of the game. I don't see Pathfinder as a safety net as so many of them do, I always approached it as a different, fun perspective in fantasy tabletops, but would like to see D&D come back to be number one. The saddest quote I heard all weekend: "It really doesn't matter what Wizards is trying to do because Paizo is doing it better. Wizards gave us 3.5 but abandoned it in favor of the abomination that was 4th edition. Edition warring aside, most players felt betrayed. I'm all about trying new things in D&D, but it will probably never get past the novelty stage. Believe me, man. I speak for most players when I say Pathfinder is the way to go. Wizards is just trying to bounce back from the failure that was 4th edition." I wasn't sure how I felt about that statement, but now I see that if we don't do our part and really pour ourselves into this, Pathfinder will become the better choice. I mean, it basically is already, as there really isn't any good, new fantasy products other than Pathfinder. I don't know about you all, but I haven't been impressed at all with the last two playtest packs. Who wants to help me resurrect 3.5???




If by everyone, you mean at most half of the DnD fan base, with a healthy portion liking both, then sure, everyone seems to love pathfinder.

BTW, I've never seen any evidence to suggest that 4e "failed" in any way, except possibly failing to keep as much of a stranglehold on the DnD exclusive portion of the TTRPG community, which was more a matter of the OGL (and literally a goal of the OGL. That is, to make sure that no matter what WoTC did, there would always be someone pushing the old stuff.) and bad marketing/PR than anything else, and even then evidence suggests that 4e has been financially sucessful, but that WoTC is supremely unhappy that someone else is competing with them by also making DnD, even if it's called something else.
Skeptical_Clown wrote:
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
104340961 wrote:
Pine trees didn't unanimously decide one day that leaves were gauche.
http://community.wizards.com/doctorbadwolf/blog/2012/01/10/how_we_can_help_make_dndnext_awesome
I dont understand all this hoopla about Pathfinder, I mean its pretty much the same as 3e, I mean really I was kinda pissed when I got the 3.5 books, I mean it was all pretty much the same thing, and now Paizo wants me to spend money buying the 3e rule books, AGAIN!? Yeah I dont think so.



Good news - Paizo gives you the core rules for Pathfinder for free: www.d20pfsrd.com

You're welcome.

Member of the Axis of Awesome

Show
Homogenising: Making vanilla in 31 different colours
I just looked through the new playtest packet and my hope is beginning to fade.  After reading the discussions concerning Skills and Ability scores then seeing the diversity of backgrounds and themes I was really excited. Now they have added a new mechanic to the fighter but it still hasn't seemed to add flavor to the class.  Maybe that is because they took other things away from them.  Just as Cleric abilities became less flavorful now that Channel Divinity is a ranged Lay on Hands unless you pick Sun Domain and then you get Daylight too.  But twice a day? Why do we even still have daily abilities in DDN, one of the things I actually liked about 4e was that it was moving away from daily abilities.  Now, I support semi-vancian casting for wizards, but other than that I don't want to see any more daily limits. 

In Paizo we have daily limits, but the effect of a daily use ability has a much longer than instant duration.  Daily abilities are powerful.  Just like in 4e those abilities that were daily were imposing and day altering abilities.

One thing being repeated in the new playtest is the ignoring of the role playing stage of the game,  the designers gave us backgrounds which at first gave me so much hope.  They are new a different from other systems and they give you role playing assets like Knights Station.  But, the abilities of the classes seem completely hands off when it comes to role paying.  Perhaps I am over reacting, it took me a little while to see the potential in the first play packet.  But, the things I saw potential in have been established and now I am judging the Development on what it has done sense.  And, I don't like the lake of flavor the classes seem to have. 

I think that is why I may end up sticking with Pathfinder, at least my Bard feels like a Bard, my Rogue feels like a Rogue.  So far with DDN, as it is in 4e, are just a bunch of dice for dungeon crawling. even in 4e some classes had more identity and character  than this.

So many of you are die hard 4e, you'll probably go ape on me.  Let me placate you all with the following. 4e has some great aspects that deserve credit and continuation into DDN. In my opinion it featured the least identifiable and enjoyable player classes to date.  And, that may just be a matter of taste.
I dont understand all this hoopla about Pathfinder, I mean its pretty much the same as 3e, I mean really I was kinda pissed when I got the 3.5 books, I mean it was all pretty much the same thing, and now Paizo wants me to spend money buying the 3e rule books, AGAIN!? Yeah I dont think so.



Good news - Paizo gives you the core rules for Pathfinder for free: www.d20pfsrd.com

You're welcome.



Yeah, but, if  I really wanted to play 3e, I'd just, you know, play 3e.
I survived Section 4 and all I got was this lousy sig Off-topic and going downhill from there
I hate pathfinder, it's basically an excercise in power creep without really addressing anything. It's like they were sitting at a table brainstorming, and some guy goes, i know what gamers want MOAR STUFF! and proceeded to just cram extra stuff in the cracks of what they considered "dead levels"
I dont understand all this hoopla about Pathfinder, I mean its pretty much the same as 3e, I mean really I was kinda pissed when I got the 3.5 books, I mean it was all pretty much the same thing, and now Paizo wants me to spend money buying the 3e rule books, AGAIN!? Yeah I dont think so.



Good news - Paizo gives you the core rules for Pathfinder for free: www.d20pfsrd.com

You're welcome.



Yeah, but, if  I really wanted to play 3e, I'd just, you know, play 3e.



If you do not want to play Pathfinder then just say that rather then, you know, saying you can not afford it.

Member of the Axis of Awesome

Show
Homogenising: Making vanilla in 31 different colours
I hate pathfinder, it's basically an excercise in power creep without really addressing anything. It's like they were sitting at a table brainstorming, and some guy goes, i know what gamers want MOAR STUFF! and proceeded to just cram extra stuff in the cracks of what they considered "dead levels"


Well, that is part of the problem -  most of the players that I've met in my years of gaming that play D&D (and nothing but D&D) want exactly that - more stuff.  They want that power, and they don't want it to creep, they want a flood.  And pathfider gives that to them.  That's why people flocked to it, IMO, it gave those munchkins what they craved.
But then again, I said the same thing when 3E came out - huge increase in power for no reason other than to placate those that want more power at the expense of those that said it was already too much.  Add to that the increase in complexity that came with the increased flexibility in character creation and I just never saw the point in making the switch from 2E, and just went play other games.  And then I said the same about 4E when I got my hands on that the first time.  So I guess I'm just an old grognard (or whatever the hell that word is) now... Cool
I dont understand all this hoopla about Pathfinder, I mean its pretty much the same as 3e, I mean really I was kinda pissed when I got the 3.5 books, I mean it was all pretty much the same thing, and now Paizo wants me to spend money buying the 3e rule books, AGAIN!? Yeah I dont think so.



Good news - Paizo gives you the core rules for Pathfinder for free: www.d20pfsrd.com

You're welcome.



Yeah, but, if  I really wanted to play 3e, I'd just, you know, play 3e.



If you do not want to play Pathfinder then just say that rather then, you know, saying you can not afford it.




lol when did I say I couldn't afford it. Is this like reverse psychology where now I'm supposed to be all like "oh yeah? I can so afford it, I'll show you I'm going out right now to buy it!"
not gonna work, your jedi mind tricks dont work on me! 

I survived Section 4 and all I got was this lousy sig Off-topic and going downhill from there
If they take what worked well in their past editions and find a way to bring those elements to the table, they can make a better system. For me that would be...


1. Allow an open style role playing, or playing from the mind, if a group so chooses to play this way it should work without hindering them.

2. Allow customization early on with choices that matter. Don't give me fluff choices that have the appearance of customization, if I want to build a zerking dual weilding axe maniac let me pick things that will contribute to my build. If I want a defensive archer that can lock down an area, let me create that build. Alot of customization makes each character feel unique. Don't save that stuff for later books, give it to the players up front, they will love you.


3. Simplify the flow of combat or challenges to a system that doesn't bog down at high levels of play and has been tested. Reduce mathmatics and make it more common sense oriented (the math is still there, but the product itself just makes sense even without knowing the math).


4. Give players cool tricks from level 1 on up. Back to point 2, give me tools to get a feel for my defensive archer from level 1, not make me wait till level 9 to see it begin to work. It will be limited at level 1 yes, but give me the feel of it already forming from the start.


5. Keep up the bang up work of well written books for players and dm's with easy to follow charts, appendixes to those charts, and resources for further helpful info online. This customer service aspect really brings it home.  


6. If a group WANTS to play with grids and mini's the game should flow easily with that without hindering point number 1. Or a mix of both just as easily. Don't force mini's, but don't neglect it either. Also keep up the cheaper alternative mini's like cutouts and such (preferably standing ones on bases instead of pogs) so DM's who want to do some battle map action can do so without dropping a fortune. Make the plastic versions really bad ass to keep those who want to continue with them and as something special.             
Many, I see, missed my point entirely. =p

I personally hated 4E, but that's just me. 4E basically flopped as far as the overall community was concerned, this fact was even admitted during the panel at ComicCon.
Personally, I prefer 3.5's freedom and versatility, that is, not being constrained with early level theme and background business. Am I the only one who thought 4E characters were overpowered in early levels? With the exception of the rogue's sneak attack die progression, of course. =p I think they're going a bit too far with it now, though.
I personally hated 4E



This appears to be the crux of this thread, but I will bite.  Pathfinder is winning on marketing and gaining mindshare.  However, Paizo isn't in the business of making games they are in the business of selling adventure paths.  There entire open beta process was a perfect exercise in marketing; it is part of the reason why WOTC is doing one this time around.

As for as the playtest goes.  I considered the last version unplayable.  This version is a least a game I could hold my nose and play, but mechanically it doesn't suit me yet.


Many, I see, missed my point entirely. =p I personally hated 4E, but that's just me. 4E basically flopped as far as the overall community was concerned, this fact was even admitted during the panel at ComicCon. Personally, I prefer 3.5's freedom and versatility, that is, not being constrained with early level theme and background business. Am I the only one who thought 4E characters were overpowered in early levels? With the exception of the rogue's sneak attack die progression, of course. =p I think they're going a bit too far with it now, though.



Nearly all of that is complete nonsense, but ok.
Skeptical_Clown wrote:
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
104340961 wrote:
Pine trees didn't unanimously decide one day that leaves were gauche.
http://community.wizards.com/doctorbadwolf/blog/2012/01/10/how_we_can_help_make_dndnext_awesome
4E basically flopped as far as the overall community was concerned,.


I assume you have the numbers to back this up?
Howdy folks,

This thread is drifting into edition war and company war territory rapidly so I'll be closing it.

Thanks.  

All around helpful simian