As far as the “D&D; feel” goes, a friend of mine came up with a great metaphor. Say that you have an enormous bowl of M&Ms.; Anyone can look at that bowl and say that there are “a lot” of M&Ms.; Once you start taking away M&Ms; from the bowl, even if you add in other candies, eventually you will reach a point where you no longer have “a lot” of M&Ms.; Eventually, you just have “some” or “a few,” and that exact moment may be difficult to elucidate but you can tell it when you see it. Fourth Edition takes too many M&Ms; away from the bowl for my taste.

And as far as a “3.75 Edition” goes, whatever company comes out with (a good version of) it first will probably have the lion’s share of my (and my gaming group’s) gaming fund from that point on.

-Jeremy Puckett

I don’t necessarily agree, gridian, especially if Paizo packaged it as the Pathfinder RPG. Gamers bring gamers into the fold. If people are playing the “Pathfinder RPG,” then they will bring new players into the fold to game with them. Those newbies never even have to know the game was built on 3.5. For that matter, new folks to True20 never have to know its foundations began with it.

Repackaging is a fine answer to that issue–of course, the grognards will know where it came from and know it’s compatible, so it will make them happy, too.

Christina

Personally, I’m glad that GR doesn’t plan on being that legacy 3.5 or “3.75” supporter. It simply seems like you’d have an ever-diminishing customer base. As time progresses, those customers would either eventually stop playing D&D; or transition to 4e. While not everyone would leave, many would, and you wouldn’t be getting much of an in flux of new players — they’d more than likely be entering the D&D; world at 4e.

I respect the hell out of GR’s decision to support their own alternatives (such as True20, which is looking very attractive to me these days) as well as carrying some 4e content.

I know all that’s a bit off topic, but Chris, I really just wanted to say that I was very happy to read about your initial 4e play experience. It was thoughtful, free from any undeserved judgment, and keenly aware of D&D; from the perspective of both a player and a designer.

Thanks again!

Maybe I’m just finally getting old, but I have a shelf of WOTC 3.5 books plus so much material from third-party publishers that I can’t imagine ever working my way through it all. Within arm’s reach, I can count $600 worth of D&D; books and that is mostly at Amazon prices. The thought of throwing all that out for a new edition, just overwhelms me. Have I really gotten $20 worth of use out of MM IV or Player’s Handbook 2? How about the Ruins of Greyhawk that we haven’t even played?

I never understood those old-timers (and this is coming from a 40-year-old) who stuck with 1st edition and vowed never to play a newer version, but 3.5 might be my line in the sand.

At best, 4e is going to play more like a MMORPG, which I don’t much enjoy, or, as you suggested, it is going to feel like a CCG, which I don’t much enjoy. In fact, it is the very sort of “exception” based rules that have left me cold on CCGs. If that really is the core feel of the new game, then I am definitely out.

I fact, I have been pretty appalled at the complete lack of discussion anywhere about how the new rules actually facilitate ROLE playing! Everything I have heard makes it sound like a character is a compilation of sleek, cool mechanics, 5-foot shifting and chain-attacking its way to victory, rather than an abstract way to express a character in a fictional world.

I guess, I just don’t see the draw for a group of mid to late 30-somethings with an established game and a huge investment in the previous edition. But then again, I suspect I am exactly the customer WOTC is willing to sacrifice for the cool, young gamers they hope to attract.

Undoutedly, Paizo is the company best suited to do that, since they have a strong campaign world already in progress to tag to it and keep players/bring new ones in–not to mention a strong, loyal following. If other companies banded together with them, then I believe it could be doable. It would be interesting to see what kind of 3.75 rulebook you guys would come up with together, as Paizo and GR have created some great D20 stuff. Throw in some Monte Cook, and it would be really interesting.

IF Paizo stayed and opened up the possibility for doing Pathfinder-licensed products, they (in conjunction with others) could make 3.75 a viable alternative to 4e. It wouldn’t be a large piece of the RPG pie, but it would be a very sustainable piece of it–and less susceptible to whims of Hasbro.

Christina

Hell I might even run Lost Caverns!