Comments on: Finding the path to a new D&D

By: KarasDjun

KarasDjun — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:54:22 +0000

Pathfinder interested me from the beginning, but the price is the limiting factor for me. I wanted to get subscribed but couldn’t see doing that at the time. Is Erik Mona still on the editorial staff? He was the only reason I kept up with Dungeon magazine at the end. His view of D&D is very similar to my own (and he was a die-hard Greyhawk fan as well).

I’ve also considered changing bits and pieces of 3.5 but found that the system is so intertwined that you have to consider a lot of ramifications on both the DM and player side before making lasting changes. What few house rules we did adopt I reverted back to by-the-book rules when I started running Forgotten Realms. Using the system as written has the advantage that I don’t have to continue reminding players of outright changes, minor alterations, etc. The skills for Pathfinder sound similar to something I was contemplating myself, basing them more on the Mentzer-era Gazetteer skill system with regards to number of skills and ability with each (1 rank/level). Of course, that causes problems at higher levels and Epic rules (which make no sense as they are anyway).

By: MetalJim

MetalJim — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:50:31 +0000

Random - stacking up the first level HP is not direct stealing, but close to 4E. Giving a feat at every odd level is 4E (but also from the newer Star Wars d20 rules). The skill compression is possibly the closest thing to 4E (again, Star Wars may be the real inspiration). I haven’t seen the 4th ed skill list, and I can’t compare them to Pathfinder, so I don’t know how close they are.

Notice I did not directly accuse Pathfinder of stealing from 4th edition. To be precise, I was thinking out loud about WHERE the boundary would exist. WotC wants to keep 4th edition as a seperate and independent system. It would suck if 3rd party groups tried to fudge/ extend the old OGL to create various clones and near copies of 4th edition, in my opinion.

By: Random

Random — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:44:12 +0000

The Paizo reps that I heard interviewed said that they are planning on producing both 4E material alongside the Pathfinder product line so I don’t think they are going anywhere. The Pathfinder line may fail, after all their target audience is the gamers who aren’t interested in change.

I think it is unfair to say that they are stealing 4E ideas. The only thing that reminded me of 4E was the skill system and I don’t know the specifics of the 4E system so I can’t really say how close they are. Of course, MetalJim, you are more familiar with 4E than I am. Can you point out other areas where there is overlap mechanically?

By: MetalJim

MetalJim — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:10:49 +0000

It is understandable that Paizo would want to develop an alternative system, especially given the fiasco that WotC is having in putting together a new licensing program for 3rd party publishers in 4th edition.

That said, how far can you go in stealing ideas from 4th edition and welding them onto “3.75″ or whatever before you get into the territory of copyright infringement? Paizo has leeway under the old 3rd edition OGL (which can never expire - it’s in the legalese), but they can’t go stealing too much from 4th edition either.

This system will appease some of the folks who are bitter/ mad at WotC in the short term. This may even cause a few people to NOT buy 4th edition. However, given the lengthy “test” period, it is unlikely that these books will ever make a big splash in the marketplace by the time they are published for real.

Despite a few good ideas, let’s check back in 3 years time and see if Paizo is a) still in business, and if so, b) publishing Pathfinder sourcebooks, or c) shifting over to 4th ed D&D modules.