|
Arivia posted:It's been mixed sometimes, sure, but Paizo's design team has consistently gone on the record as having a better eye for things than you'd think. They've been pretty upfront about how they're carrying 3.5 baggage they deliberately didn't eject for compatibility reasons in the first edition of Pathfinder, and that they can do better. This is their chance to fix that, and being aware of the actual issues with their system is a good step. I don't know what this means. They have a 'better eye for things'? What are some of these things? Hit me with some awesome design decisions they've eyed. As for being upfront about carrying 3.5E baggage that is a regular laugh riot. They took 3.5E and released a houseruled version of it, this isn't that they're carrying baggage they can't eject for 'compatibility' this is baggage they are carrying because they packed it and continue to include it in everything they do.
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 04:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 04:23 |
|
|
Sampatrick posted:The sacred cow that 4e rejected was just one of the genre trappings of the D&D-alike genre (or subgenre or whatever); that magic does things in combat and out of combat. There's a reason why people complained about 4e D&D not feeling like D&D. It may have been a dumb critique of a game, but it's definitely true that 4e took huge strides away from what had come before it. Call it a subgenre or whatever you want to call it, but at this point there are certainly some trappings that a D&D or D&D-like game needs to have in order to feel like it's a D&D or D&D-like game. I don't think there's really any argument at all that those trappings exist and form a subgenre or genre or whatever, and non-combat magic is definitely one of those trappings. Yeah, and it's not just because D&D the RPG is its own distinct thing, but because D&D the RPG also became D&D video games, and D&D books, and inspired other games and books, so even people new to roleplaying can come with certain expectations when it comes to what makes a game D&D. I never played 4e, and maybe I would have enjoyed it if I had, but reading the PHB my first reaction really was 'this isn't D&D.'
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 04:24
|
|
|
Ither posted:Wait, what? There was a time where Paizo's PR was pushing them as the good, progressive TTG company that cared about people. It got especially notable in 5e's lead up, what with Mearls openly aligning himself with some of the most toxic parts of the industry. Oh, they still had lots of issues, especially whenever the nasty racist parts of their whole pulp fantasy boner got brought up, put they (ssssssssorrrrta) had the promise that They Are Trying To Do better. Since that time, Paizo has...stopped doing that. And while no specifics have been aired, former Paizo employees have mentioned enough to pick up on there (broadly) being a more progressive faction in the company, and a far more regressive and conservative faction - with the latter being made of mostly the men on staff, who are also the ones who are the ones largely in control of the company, so it's increasingly pretty clear that whatever minor culture war happened in the company, there's been a winner. To put it another way, there was a time where Paizo was the company that introduced one of their iconics as a trans woman. The current Paizo intentionally excluded her from their 2018 International Women's Day thing. Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:I've never played pathfinder because it looks like a slog to me but "it takes a move action to open a door!!!" is exactly the sort of flippant non-criticism that everyone here complained about re: 4e. No RPG system lives and dies by how quickly a character can open a door relative to how quickly they can attack. Sure, but it's also potentially telling about OTHER system problems. Like, yes, "it takes a move action to open a door!!!" is a kinda nonsense problem that probably doesn't actually come up that often, if ever. But at the same time, someone sat down on this engine and decided that it takes a move action to open a door - and it was never fixed. It's a minor thing that doesn't come up much, but there's also a fuckton of minor things, and eventually SOME of them are gonna start to come up. "It takes a move action to open a door!" isn't silly because of what it implies about the settings or universes, it's silly because of what it means for trying to actually have in-game combat, and how an unlocked door is literally more time consuming and difficult to deal with then a wall of fire. Or how it takes longer to reach into my pocket and pull out my wallet then it takes for a wizard to reach into their spell pouch and pull out powdered rhubarb leaf, an adder’s stomach, and a dart, but definitely NOT the ground up mica or gold dust worth exactly 25 gold, which I can tell apart by feel alone, apparently, or the live spider I plan on eating. Or how it takes me longer to pull out a dart (that I'm going to throw) then to pull out a dart (that I'm going to sprinkle powdered rhubarb leaf onto). It's a silly rule that people ignore, of course, because it's d20, and d20 games inevitably turn towards freeform; put it with all the other rules we ignore. But the fact that you ignore the rule doesn't make it a good one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 04:31
|
|
|
What I don't understand is when was the action economy in D&D a huge problem? Both 5e and PF 2 are making shows of being strict about it but even in 3.x, barring "bag of rats" silliness it wasn't a major issue.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 04:38
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:What I don't understand is when was the action economy in D&D a huge problem? Both 5e and PF 2 are making shows of being strict about it but even in 3.x, barring "bag of rats" silliness it wasn't a major issue. 1. Your party has 5 times more actions than even the toughest of bad guys. 2. Your wizards and druids summon guys who have even more turns. 3. There is a feat that gives you a whole second dude.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 04:42
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:In 3e it was one of the signature problems. And 3.0 ignored playtest feedback and left Haste in able to let casters throw 2 spells a turn, making the otherwise garbage boots of speed (10 rounds of haste per day) the most valuable item in the game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 04:53
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:What I don't understand is when was the action economy in D&D a huge problem? Both 5e and PF 2 are making shows of being strict about it but even in 3.x, barring "bag of rats" silliness it wasn't a major issue. The problem is mostly around the long lists of classifications as to what counts as which kind of action. For example, the 5 foot step counts as "not an action", except only if you haven't already moved.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 05:00
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Yeah, and it's not just because D&D the RPG is its own distinct thing, but because D&D the RPG also became D&D video games, and D&D books, and inspired other games and books, so even people new to roleplaying can come with certain expectations when it comes to what makes a game D&D. I never played 4e, and maybe I would have enjoyed it if I had, but reading the PHB my first reaction really was 'this isn't D&D.' What exactly are the trappings here that 4e dropped that made it so alien and un-D&D-like that Pathfinder/3e retained? What makes Pathfinder/3e a truer inheritor of D&D than 4e? Does 5e bring any of these elements back? Are there any elements that make 4e different besides the whole "a clear attempt to balance the martial and caster classes" that apparently everyone is sick of being dragged up because it's true, and we're not trying to pretend we care that some characters can throttle a game to death easily anymore by existing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 05:27
|
|
|
Nuns with Guns posted:What exactly are the trappings here that 4e dropped that made it so alien and un-D&D-like that Pathfinder/3e retained? What makes Pathfinder/3e a truer inheritor of D&D than 4e? Does 5e bring any of these elements back? Are there any elements that make 4e different besides the whole "a clear attempt to balance the martial and caster classes" that apparently everyone is sick of being dragged up because it's true, and we're not trying to pretend we care that some characters can throttle a game to death easily anymore by existing? Honestly, two of the most common complaints I've heard about 4th Edition are that they dropped vancian spellcasting and natural-language ability descriptions. Do I think the changes made the game better? Yes. Are they clearly something that parts of the D&D community value? Also yes. The fact that characters get so many powers also tends to turn people off but that has been replicated in most of the later Pathfinder classes anyways.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 06:00
|
|
|
I just find it hilarious that PF continued to be a thing after 5e. Why bother?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 06:09
|
|
|
counterspin posted:I just find it hilarious that PF continued to be a thing after 5e. Why bother? Because the rabid PF fans see 5e as a rather naked attempt to court them back (it is) and thus an admission that PF is the true inheritor of D&D (it isn't)
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 06:15
|
|
|
counterspin posted:I just find it hilarious that PF continued to be a thing after 5e. Why bother? Because 5e is a worse product and game in literally everyway except having the actual product identity of 5e.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 06:16
|
|
|
It would be very easy to make a non-LFQW edition of D&D (again): I can't speak for 5th, but otherwise the phenomenon only really existed in 3rd ed and its offshoots. If nu-Pathfinder doesn't achieve it, it's because they couldn't be bothered.
Xotl fucked around with this message at 07:35 on Mar 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 06:24
|
|
|
counterspin posted:I just find it hilarious that PF continued to be a thing after 5e. Why bother? because 5e was made to pander to customers allegedly lost by 4e that switched to PF, so sticking to PF shows that they're not sellouts nor rubes
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 06:26
|
|
|
Enola Gay-For-Pay posted:This is excellent, as long as we assume that the setting considers this a necessary and worthwhile addition to a party, in much the same way it's ridiculous to assume adventuring parties exist in the first place. Why wouldn’t you bring him along? He can pull platinum coins from out of people’s ears, an infinite number of times per day. Also, realistic clerics cannot heal wounds, but can confer a morale based temporary HP via faith healing, and the placebo effect. Alternatively, just keep the classes largely the same as they are now, but establish in no uncertain terms in the core that the Fighter is more handsome, popular, and has a bigger penis than the Wizard.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 06:26
|
|
|
Arivia posted:Because 5e is a worse product and game in literally everyway except having the actual product identity of 5e. Pull the other one, it's got bells on it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 06:27
|
|
|
Slimnoid posted:Pull the other one, it's got bells on it. Pathfinder does not have Zak Smith or John Tarnowski as consultants u.u
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 06:29
|
|
|
counterspin posted:I just find it hilarious that PF continued to be a thing after 5e. Why bother? 5th Edition is a half-assed attempt to capture the magic of 3rd Edition, Pathfinder is actually 3rd edition but with new stuff.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 06:30
|
|
|
Sampatrick posted:The sacred cow that 4e rejected was just one of the genre trappings of the D&D-alike genre (or subgenre or whatever); that magic does things in combat and out of combat. There's a reason why people complained about 4e D&D not feeling like D&D. It may have been a dumb critique of a game, but it's definitely true that 4e took huge strides away from what had come before it. Call it a subgenre or whatever you want to call it, but at this point there are certainly some trappings that a D&D or D&D-like game needs to have in order to feel like it's a D&D or D&D-like game. I don't think there's really any argument at all that those trappings exist and form a subgenre or genre or whatever, and non-combat magic is definitely one of those trappings. There's plenty of out-of-combat magic in 4e, it just goes under the label "rituals". The actual difference in 4e is that out-of-combat magic is no longer limited to only people that also use in-combat magic. Terrible nerds reject this because they've never branched out beyond D&D enough to even read an old Discworld novel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 06:34
|
|
|
Roadie posted:There's plenty of out-of-combat magic in 4e, it just goes under the label "rituals". The actual difference in 4e is that out-of-combat magic is no longer limited to only people that also use in-combat magic. Even then with their skill selection and access to the ritual magic feat for free wizards and clerics are still the best at it. But that's not good enough for the Grog. Nope, if you're strong enough to move a boulder you don't get to have cool things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 06:37
|
|
|
My favorite edition of DnD is 13th Age.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 07:20
|
|
|
Ither posted:My favorite edition of DnD is 13th Age. Same 
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 07:26
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:Even then with their skill selection and access to the ritual magic feat for free wizards and clerics are still the best at it. "It's bad that martial classes can take the Ritual Caster feat" is a flavor of grog I've never tasted before.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 07:35
|
|
|
Pathfinder is more fun than DnD5e because the hugeass list of classes and silly things is all on the free SRD. So you can have a semi-balanced fun game going "tier 3 and 4 only guys" with it. Miss me with that Fighter Cleric Rogue Wizard poo poo. Hit me with the Harbinger Inquisitor Alchemist Vizier. Do you know what any of those classes do? NOPE and that's great they're all wack in different ways and you get to play one for free just by opening up your computer. Even your phone if you get the text readable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 08:15
|
|
|
Slimnoid posted:Pull the other one, it's got bells on it. No, it's true. Better content, better system, better designers. 5e is the dregs of pretty much everything and it really, really shows.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 08:17
|
|
|
The solution at this juncture to resolve LFQW is to just remove pure Martials.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 08:48
|
|
|
Nuns with Guns posted:What exactly are the trappings here that 4e dropped that made it so alien and un-D&D-like that Pathfinder/3e retained? What makes Pathfinder/3e a truer inheritor of D&D than 4e? Does 5e bring any of these elements back? Are there any elements that make 4e different besides the whole "a clear attempt to balance the martial and caster classes" that apparently everyone is sick of being dragged up because it's true, and we're not trying to pretend we care that some characters can throttle a game to death easily anymore by existing? Again, I don't have any actual play experience with 4e (or 5e or PF yet), so maybe it played wonderfully and its main failure was not convincing people to give it a chance, but looking through the 4e phb I just had the unoriginal impression that the class abilities seemed to be drawing from MMOs. Maybe that's not how it actually plays, or maybe I saw someone express that idea beforehand and it influenced my thinking, but that was my initial impression either way. Abandoning Greyhawk and nuking Forgotten Realms with a bunch of weird poo poo kind of added to the impression that it was a major break with the past (including the numerous books and video games people had read and played set in FR), which 5e obviously tried to remedy by undoing those changes to make FR normal again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 08:52
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Again, I don't have any actual play experience with 4e (or 5e or PF yet), so maybe it played wonderfully and its main failure was not convincing people to give it a chance, but looking through the 4e phb I just had the unoriginal impression that the class abilities seemed to be drawing from MMOs. Maybe that's not how it actually plays, or maybe I saw someone express that idea beforehand and it influenced my thinking, but that was my initial impression either way. Abandoning Greyhawk and nuking Forgotten Realms with a bunch of weird poo poo kind of added to the impression that it was a major break with the past (including the numerous books and video games people had read and played set in FR), which 5e obviously tried to remedy by undoing those changes to make FR normal again. forgotten realms gets nuked with almost every system changed and proper formatting doesn't equal mmo's maybe try actually reading the book
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 08:57
|
|
|
Elfgames posted:forgotten realms gets nuked with almost every system changed and proper formatting doesn't equal mmo's maybe try actually reading the book It got nuked harder than usual, and I'm very sorry to have offended you with my admittedly cursory take on a dead edition of dungeons and dragons.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 08:58
|
|
|
It did not, actually, get blown up any harder then the previous half dozen times it exploded.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 08:59
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:It got nuked harder than usual, and I'm very sorry to have offended you with my admittedly cursory take on a dead edition of dungeons and dragons. you should be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 09:03
|
|
|
Mr. Maltose posted:It did not, actually, get blown up any harder then the previous half dozen times it exploded. Advancing the timeline a hundred years to try to clear the board and throw out a lot of what people knew about the setting so it would fit the points of light theme better seems more significant than killing a few gods in the time of troubles, which they also did this time, even if they found ways to bring back the popular characters eventually because they didn't want to live with the changes that were forced on them in the first place (and which they obviously undid going into 5e).
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 09:04
|
|
|
Are we really going to rehash the greatest edition warring hits of 2008 a decade on? It's kind of mind-blowing how much traction the "it's an MMO!" meme has.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 09:07
|
|
|
ah yes they tyrannical changes they forced upon themselves until finally they rallied the courage to stand against themselves and right the great wrongs done to themselves, by themselves, and saved the feeling of playing D&D from being an MMO. Quick, say combat as sport, I've almost hit bingo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 09:10
|
|
|
look say what you want about 4e but it just doesn't feel like d&d if there aren't at least five splatbooks describing NPCs who have hosed elminster
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 09:16
|
|
|
Mr. Maltose posted:ah yes they tyrannical changes they forced upon themselves until finally they rallied the courage to stand against themselves and right the great wrongs done to themselves, by themselves, and saved the feeling of playing D&D from being an MMO. It's definitely normal to be this pissy about a dead game. Obviously there were editorial mandates that a lot of the writers had to deal with, just like every other edition switch (just bigger), so it's not the same people forcing themselves to deal with a situation they don't want. I don't care what they do with FR, but obviously a lot of people do care about the setting, and presumably they reverted a lot of the changes because they didn't feel they were serving those fans with the 4e version. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 09:20 on Mar 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 09:17
|
|
|
Mr. Maltose posted:ah yes they tyrannical changes they forced upon themselves until finally they rallied the courage to stand against themselves and right the great wrongs done to themselves, by themselves, and saved the feeling of playing D&D from being an MMO. is the Warlord more of a quarterback or a mike linebacker
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 09:19
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:It's definitely normal to be this pissy about a dead game. Maybe, just maybe, consider the possibility that you're saying really stupid poo poo instead of being the One Insightful, Rational Poster in a room full of people so dumb and goddamn crazy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 09:19
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Maybe, just maybe, consider the possibility that you're saying really stupid poo poo instead of being the One Insightful, Rational Poster in a room full of people so dumb and goddamn crazy. I admitted I didn't play the game, so I'm not claiming to have any special insight here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 09:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 04:23 |
|
|
Sinteres posted:I admitted I didn't play the game, so I'm not claiming to have any special insight here. No, you're just regurgitating the same dumb bullshit from 10 years ago then acting like everyone's being unreasonably mean to you when they don't decide to give it a fair shake this time. Nobody here is impressed in the eleventy millionth "I never played [GAME], but let me give you my personal hot takes on it."
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2018 09:23
|
|