|
Zurai posted:I've met multiple people who prefer simple characters without a lot of decision space. Generally, it's people who are in it for the roleplaying and hanging out aspects and who don't care to learn all the intricacies of more complicated characters.
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 13:27 |
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:There's definitely an audience for games where most/all the system mastery happens at character creation but I think there are significant tensions between this design goal and tactical play, to the point where it's really easy for one or the other to end up invalidating each other. Good old Sentinel Comics RPG where gaining "experience" (which is measured instead in stuff called Back Issues and Collections) can either just be spent on roll boosts during play, or used to rebuild your character. You don't get more powerful, you just change your powers to represent a change in your comic. Now it's the 90s and you need to carry a huge gun and have one glowing eye, etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:07
|
|
|
theironjef posted:Good old Sentinel Comics RPG where gaining "experience" (which is measured instead in stuff called Back Issues and Collections) can either just be spent on roll boosts during play, or used to rebuild your character. You don't get more powerful, you just change your powers to represent a change in your comic. Now it's the 90s and you need to carry a huge gun and have one glowing eye, etc. Now that I think about it I would definitely at least try a TTRPG where you draft your character's abilities Slay the Spire-style.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:08
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:There's definitely an audience for games where most/all the system mastery happens at character creation but I think there are significant tensions between this design goal and tactical play, to the point where it's really easy for one or the other to end up invalidating each other.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:10
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:Now that I think about it I would definitely at least try a TTRPG where you draft your character's abilities Slay the Spire-style. Conceptually I love it, especially for games that are intended to be short plays only. Like a lot of the time in Slay the Spire you'll be all "I'm the Outcast and I want to do ice orb build," and the game will laugh at you and give you nothing but Dark and Scratch cards. But the worst that happens then is you let the Time Slug kill you and start again. In an RPG format you'd either have to contend with RNG sometimes loving you over for a long while, or remove the RNG, which is almost identical to what 4e looks like. Level 5, time to pick one of these five options for a daily power! Nessus posted:I reached lv 13 on a paladin in a 5e game and only just now realized I can change spells. As a woebegone Cuban dwarf, though, this suits Buscaro This is a great example of how it really isn't that big of a problem though, right? Like you're playing a Paladin still, and maybe you don't know you can change spells, but you're casting spells! You're smiting! You've got access to a range of paladin tools and are using them. The problem with the "Simple class for simple guys" argument is always that it takes to an almost Neandertal extreme, as if you've got this guy at the table that can just barely manage to roll a D20 once every 8 minutes or so, and who will be mollified if they hear "You did a big number" after they roll it. Like the very initial post that got me responding was something about 4e not having the "Just rolls a D20 and hears the results" barbarian equivalent. And yeah, good, because that's the level of complexity reduction that comes off as mean-spirited gatekeeping. People that are legitimately at that level of interest in an RPG would be way better served playing a different one, and trying to shoehorn them into the dragon game by making a training wheels baby class for them is downright missing the point. theironjef fucked around with this message at 19:21 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:14
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Why? Really carrying that cross, eh?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:19
|
|
|
It is possible to play neither DnD or PF in the rpg space, and think they're both lovely. DnD for cutthroat loving over a business partner, and PF for setting back rpgs by 10 years by actively creating a regressive culture war over mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:26
|
|
|
Arivia posted:Really carrying that cross, eh? This is why it's hard to talk about what happened. Anyway, yeah the Simple Class is generally great for the "I don't really want to interact with the system or other players" who want to browse their feeds at the table. Which is kind of a chicken or the egg of disengagement.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:28
|
|
|
Arivia posted:Really carrying that cross, eh?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:30
|
|
|
PharmerBoy posted:It is possible to play neither DnD or PF in the rpg space, and think they're both lovely. DnD for cutthroat loving over a business partner, and PF for setting back rpgs by 10 years by actively creating a regressive culture war over mechanics. I don't think culture warring over mechanics was invented by Paizo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:30
|
|
|
True enough. For as long as there are nerds we will argue over pedantic poo poo. I'll revise the statement to granting the culture war a marketing budget. PharmerBoy fucked around with this message at 19:56 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:34
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Yeah, they were told in April that September was their last issue of Dragon. If five months of publication isn't enough time to avoid the complete collapse of your entire business without MADing the entire hobby then maybe that's on you? The two events are disconnected. Their response to Dragon ending was to start up the Adventure Paths. Their response to the later revelation that 4e wouldn't be OGL was to produce Pathfinder. The first 4 Adventure Paths were produced for 3.5 because it was the most current OGL system. The first book of Rise of the Runelords was published in August of 2007 -- the same month Wizards announced 4th Edition.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:36
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Thanks for illustrating the point I guess! It’s been fifteen years (or thereabouts, if you want to be a pedant) You can let it go that someone liked a different RPG than you. If it was anything other than the 4e crowd here painting their game as so unfairly maligned, it would be utterly pathetic and you’d be laughed off the forum. That is what makes the endless 4e chat in this thread so pointless and boring. It’s not discussing differences between editions, or actual industry trends or problems. It’s the “woe is me people were so mean to my favorite version of D&D years ago” talk and all the unfounded implications you shovel into that without ever actually having or allowing for any discussion that things might be different from your pity party. It kills the actual discussion and turns it into the same old posters circlejerking. Good job at doing it again, I guess. e: and I’m saying this as someone who likes 4e. The sob story is loving overplayed as hell. Arivia fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:40
|
|
|
Arivia posted:That is what makes the endless 4e chat in this thread so pointless and boring. It’s not discussing differences between editions, or actual industry trends or problems. It’s the “woe is me people were so mean to my favorite version of D&D years ago” talk and all the unfounded implications you shovel into that without ever actually having or allowing for any discussion that things might be different from your pity party. Are you reading the thread? Because this Arivia posted:It kills the actual discussion and turns it into the same old posters circlejerking. Good job at doing it again, I guess. is what you just did.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:43
|
|
|
I don't want to hand out probations but you guys need to stop sniping at each other or I will have to. This 4e discussion, in the absence of any industry stuff of recent relevance to talk about, has been fine and civil for the most part: please don't go out of your way to change that. I'm not just talking to Arivia here. Edition warring is off limits.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:48
|
|
|
Arivia posted:It’s been fifteen years (or thereabouts, if you want to be a pedant) I do think when someone goes "Paizo making an OGL continuation of 3.5 to keep their business going is MADing the hobby" or, i guess, more accurately "Paizo marketing their OGL continuation of 3.5" as some kind of hobbyist nuclear warfare while also holding that we should really stop playing D&D is this bizarre, contorted position that I have no idea why anyone would hold. I think that's a bit different from feeling some nostalgia for 4e, but by this point, there's actually plenty of RPG product for that niche, I don't know what the heck people are saying we lost for having that level of competition in the hobby.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:50
|
|
|
e: deleted per mod instruction
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:51
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I don't want to hand out probations but you guys need to stop sniping at each other or I will have to. To be clear, the point I’m trying to make isn’t one about edition wars. I frankly don’t care at this point whether 4e or Pathfinder 1e is better. I’m trying to point out the really bad discourse that pops up and keeps dragging the thread down - as kestrel pointed out, and as you yourself identified (even if you later walked it back). You can’t have an actual discussion about some industry stuff in here because it gets drowned out by “PAIZO DID A CULTURE WAR AND KILLED 4E.”
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:00
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:I do think when someone goes "Paizo making an OGL continuation of 3.5 to keep their business going is MADing the hobby" or, i guess, more accurately "Paizo marketing their OGL continuation of 3.5" as some kind of hobbyist nuclear warfare while also holding that we should really stop playing D&D is this bizarre, contorted position that I have no idea why anyone would hold. Yeah. It's one of those things where "Paizo had to make their own fork of 3.5 to keep their business going, and advertising that is going to involve some amount of edition war stuff because that's how the rpg community works" and "Paizo inflamed it more than they needed to" are both true, and you need to draw a line for yourself. And, well, it's been 15 years. People are going to soften on it over time, it happens.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:04
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:"Paizo marketing their OGL continuation of 3.5"
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:07
|
|
|
Zurai posted:The two events are disconnected. Their response to Dragon ending was to start up the Adventure Paths. Their response to the later revelation that 4e wouldn't be OGL was to produce Pathfinder. The first 4 Adventure Paths were produced for 3.5 because it was the most current OGL system. The first book of Rise of the Runelords was published in August of 2007 -- the same month Wizards announced 4th Edition. E: specific other user sniping removed But we should move on! A 15 year old topic of whether or not Paizo allowed a false narrative to develop around them being specifically mistreated by WotC thereby putting them in a more favourable light to become the defacto standard surely has no bearing on 2023's industry news. HidaO-Win posted:We still see the effects today. I know I took issue at the time with WotCs high handed behaviour towards Paizo during 4e, leading me to get on the Pathfinder side of the conflict, despite 4e being the more interesting game mechanically, but that’s apparently nothing compared to how prepared Paizo were for WotC to pull the same poo poo again. The ORC came across as something unearthed from a war chest labelled “WotC are at it again” Thanlis posted:Paizo had almost a month of warning that it was coming since WotC reached out to content creators in December. Kyle Brink just confirmed that Paizo was on that list. And they’re great marketers. Splicer fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:19
|
|
|
Splicer posted:"WotC pulled the rug out from under Paizo with almost no notice" was definitely part of The Discourse at the time. But Arivia's right, a 15 year old topic of whether or not Paizo allowed a false narrative to develop around them being specifically mistreated by WotC thereby putting them in a more favourable light to become the defacto standard surely has no bearing on 2023's industry news. I'm not sure whether you're intentionally misreading or what. Paizo did not have 5 months' notice that WotC was going to produce 4E without a permissive OGL. They had 5 months' notice that their contract to produce Dragon Magazine was going to end. Their reaction to the ending of Dragon Magazine was to produce the Pathfinder Adventure Path series of supplements, which were NOT linked to the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game at first because the latter did not exist in any form, even conceptual, at the start. Like, believe what you want about the results of the Pathfinder RPG marketing, but saying "they had 5 months to prepare for it" is patently false (and also pretty ignorant of the publishing industry, I might add).
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:25
|
|
|
Zurai posted:I've met multiple people who prefer simple characters without a lot of decision space. Generally, it's people who are in it for the roleplaying and hanging out aspects and who don't care to learn all the intricacies of more complicated characters. They should play a different game, maybe one not designed to give the players a ton of fiddly crunchy nonsense to build characters and play with.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:26
|
|
|
Can anyone who followed the Darkest Dungeon bg Kickstarter pinpoint exactly when Mythic Games went under for me? I'm seeing all their stuff undergoing firesales now that the IPs were sold, and it's a little sad since Reichbusters (post errata) seems like it was everything the Wolfenstein boardgame should have been.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:26
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:I think people conflate three different phenomena and try to make a single use-case that covers all of them. There's also 'this campaign I just want to take it easy, hang out with buddies, and reduce my spotlight time' - this was a big part of my thinking for taking a slayer in one game, and it did actually work fine for that. FWIW I was playing a druid in the campaign before and a warlord in the campaign after (all 4e) so I'm not allergic to complexity - but it was refreshing and was actually pretty good for letting me focus on making the other newer players have a good time. I think the approach of being able to swap out active or interactive character components with passive ones to reduce complexity and vice versa is pretty good - it's interesting that you've since seen it in WoW talents where there's often been a tradeoff between an active ability that's a new button to press, and a passive that's not quite as good in the ideal situation but is good enough and reduces your plate juggling requirements.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:29
|
|
|
Lemon-Lime posted:They should play a different game, maybe one not designed to give the players a ton of fiddly crunchy nonsense to build characters and play with. Yes, because playing by themselves is absolutely what the "I want to hang out with my friends and don't care that much about the mechanics of what game we play" crowd wants.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:33
|
|
|
Lemon-Lime posted:They should play a different game, maybe one not designed to give the players a ton of fiddly crunchy nonsense to build characters and play with. It is not so easy to find another game or GM in most places so you make due with what's available
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:35
|
|
|
Lemon-Lime posted:They should play a different game, maybe one not designed to give the players a ton of fiddly crunchy nonsense to build characters and play with. The problem with that is the same thing that 5e’s seized on - lots of people play D&D due to the brand name, and it’s infeasible to tell your friends “hey can we not play D&D and play a different game [and possibly one I don’t know or no one knows] when everyone just knows D&D.” People have provided examples of what they would do for an simple character in 4e, but none of those (with the exception of gradenko pointing out the “easy” Twin Strike ranger falls off or gets much more complex over time) address the notable gap at 4e’s release. It’s easy to say “just play something simpler” but it’s much harder to get a whole social group to do that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:36
|
|
|
Zurai posted:I'm not sure whether you're intentionally misreading or what. e: I'm also explicitly mea culpaing here on me loving up the actual Pathfinder timeline, I thought they'd started development prior to the GSL announcement. Which makes the whole "4e sucks because they did design at it" attitude even worse, since the 4e gsl had enough to complain about on its own. Splicer fucked around with this message at 20:53 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:39
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I'm not misreading or contradicting you, I'm saying that plucky Paizo having their contract pulled out from under them at unreasonably short notice is part of the Pathfinder creation myth. It's part of their brand as the Bugs Bunny to WotC's Elmer Fudd. Like the last time I heard it brought up /in person/ was in the context of talking about Pathfinder 2E, so sometime in the past threeish years. “Pathfinder creation myth?” The point is, regardless of whatever myth you think it is, Paizo did have the license pulled from them on extremely short notice and did have to scramble to create the Pathfinder APs as a way to keep the company going, separate from the Pathfinder RPG. It’s not a myth, it’s objective public truth.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:41
|
|
|
At this point, its hard to argue that Paizo's made an industry out of pointing out Wizards' fuckups. They're shrewd marketers, especially compared to Wizards' strategy of "gently caress you, we're D&D." They're not afraid to make moves that indirectly benefit them, like the ORC, whenever they're in the shadow of another big mistake. They're beyond their original Pathfinder marketing strategy now. "Wizards is taking away / controlling your D&D, and we're the ones putting it back in your hands" is a ball thoroughly in Kobold Press' court now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:47
|
|
|
Zurai posted:Yes, because playing by themselves is absolutely what the "I want to hang out with my friends and don't care that much about the mechanics of what game we play" crowd wants. Seriously? Your literal only possible concept of "My friend should play a game that fits them better" is "Well, they're gonna have to do it themselves then"? Like you don't first go "Oh maybe we should all try a game that works for all of us"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:49
|
|
|
honestly i'm sure there's some kind of Anti-Ludic Monster who gets more displeasure from engaging with mechanics than i get pleasure from engaging with them, but you have to consider that i hate them with my life and intentionally advocate for game design that will make them suffer. better a rules lawyer than a rule utilitarian
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 20:54
|
|
|
If they hate engaging with mechanics they should simply not engage with mechanics and consequently experience subpar in-game outcomes. They don't care, right? They don't like mechanics! Put your damage per round where your mouth is, buddy!
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 21:01
|
|
|
theironjef posted:Seriously? Your literal only possible concept of "My friend should play a game that fits them better" is "Well, they're gonna have to do it themselves then"? Like you don't first go "Oh maybe we should all try a game that works for all of us"? First, maybe you should tone down the firebreathing considering there was just a mod in here asking people to tone down the firebreathing. Second, the post I was responding to didn't say "The group should find a different game", it said "They (they players who don't care what game they play) should find a different game." You're aiming your ire at the wrong poster here. Third, the people I'm talking about really don't care what game they play. They're not unhappy playing the crunchy game, they just prefer not to have to engage with the deepest pits of crunch. Fourth, in a six-person group, five of whom really enjoy the crunchy bits and one of whom is ambivalent about them, I don't think the proper solution is to find "one not designed to give the players a ton of fiddly crunchy nonsense to work with". That would result in five unhappy players and one player who is having less fun than before because their friends are having less fun than before.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 21:01
|
|
|
Hi I'm a basic attacker. I don't really like combat so I prefer speedrunning through my turn while hopefully contributing at least in some basic way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 21:02
|
|
|
Zurai posted:Yes, because playing by themselves is absolutely what the "I want to hang out with my friends and don't care that much about the mechanics of what game we play" crowd wants. The rest of the group can also play this other game, instead of punishing one player for not wanting fiddly crunchy bullshit. Zurai posted:Second, the post I was responding to didn't say "The group should find a different game", it said "They (they players who don't care what game they play) should find a different game." You're aiming your ire at the wrong poster here. What an insanely disingenuous take. e; Zurai posted:Third, the people I'm talking about really don't care what game they play. They're not unhappy playing the crunchy game, they just prefer not to have to engage with the deepest pits of crunch. "They're not unhappy playing the crunchy game, they just don't want to engage with the entire thing that the game is entirely about" is an absolutely ridiculous thing to type. There's a near-infinite amount of games out there, most of which will do what they want infinitely better than D&D and its clones will ever be able to do. The solution isn't to make D&D worse, it's to let them play a game that's actually designed to support the play style they want to experience. Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 21:06
|
|
|
Lemon-Lime posted:The rest of the group can also play this other game, instead of punishing one player for not wanting fiddly crunchy bullshit. Shocking, I know. Pot, kettle. I very specifically said that the players in question didn't care what game we played. They aren't being "punished" and that's frankly an incredibly insulting assertion. They're often the ones asking "when are we playing next". There seem to be some people here who cannot comprehend that you don't have to fully engage with every aspect of an RPG system to enjoy playing it. EDIT: Lemon-Lime posted:The solution isn't to make D&D worse, it's to let them play a game that's actually designed to support the play style they want to experience. Jesus loving tapdancing Christ, is that what your vitriol is about? Please find where I ever suggested "making D&D worse" (or even that we were playing D&D at all, because some of these experiences are from Burning Wheel). I was responding to someone who suggested that players who prefer simple characters don't exist by stating that I've met and played with a few. Maybe read the loving thread before you start the flamethrowers. Zurai fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 21:09
|
|
|
Or the rest of the group could play the game they were excited for, and they either find a different day to play a simpler game with that friend or a different angle of hanging out that they can all get behind.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 21:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 13:27 |
|
|
A well-designed game anticipates a certain amount of engagement from each player. Imagine trying to play Pandemic with someone who refused to use their role's ability. Someone who isn't is effectively sandbagging, and I think we've evolved sufficiently past "no wrong way to have fun" to recognize that fun at others' expense is actually the wrong fun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 21:14
|
|