Pathfinder

[quarrel]

A company makes a car. Said company promotes that car as having a top speed of 100 mph and being suitable for all drivers. A subset of customers is generally unhappy with this car, reporting that it performs poorly once you get it above 60 mph. Regular, independent commentary appears on multiple discussion forums that the acceleration is poor, there’s a lot of road noise, and the handling is particularly questionable.

The majority of that model’s owners, however, give it glowing reviews. They say they’ve never had problems with it, and that all their friends have one and they all like it too, and they point out that it’s just fine for grocery shopping, daily commutes, and driving the kids to soccer games. When informed of the problems that high-speed drivers experienced, they turn defensive. Those people are just haters. They’re elitists who’s real motive is to dump on things and boost their own egos, not present honest opinions. And anyway, driving that fast is unnecessary and unethical in the first place. This car works just fine if you only use it in the manner that all reasonable drivers should use it, so the “expert” complaints aren’t legitimate.

If you’re trying to buy a new car, which group would you listen to?

Dungeons & Dragons has been in such a state in recent years. Four years ago, the company that makes it shifted paradigms without a clutch and released a new, incompatible 4th edition with significant — and ultimately unpopular — mechanical and stylistic differences from the then-current version 3.5. A third-party company that had been in the business of making adventures, sourcebooks, and other add-on products for 3.5 took it upon themselves to fashion their own main rulebook to that now-abandoned product line. They called this new rule system Pathfinder, and they claimed their revisions fixed a slew of balance issues that weren’t addressed (or weren’t addressed correctly) when D&D’s owners originally created version 3.5 from 3.0.

I’ve encountered wildly varying opinions of Pathfinder from people who’ve played it. Three or four friends speak well of it. They say they have a blast playing it and that it’s everything its creators make it out to be. On the other hand, I’ve found trenchant and undiplomatic, yet plausible and well-reasoned, criticism of it here, as well as a discussion here of why it’s been so popular and commercially successful despite its design shortcomings and marketing dishonesty. And I can’t get any Pathfinder fan I know to evaluate those arguments rationally. Now, granted, that site is extremely hostile to fanboys, arrogant newcomers, amateurish works, and poor arguments, so it’s understandable that most people won’t enjoy the discussions there, but I’m the only one I know who doesn’t agree a priori with the bulk of its content yet is willing to read it. Predictably, I’m batting zero in personal conversations when it comes to getting either side to address particular opposing claims I want to delve into deeper.