General Disney Sniffing Around Hasbro? - Page 7




+ Log in or register to post
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 71
  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by delericho View Post
    So you want to see an end to the fun of (at least) tens of thousands of people, plus an end to the employment of all the staff at Paizo (not to mention the resulting job losses in FLGS, distributors, and elsewhere in the chain), because of the actions of a handful of obnoxious internet posters? Isn't that a slight over-reaction?
    I think that all it would do is force pathfinder 2e witch would be just enough diffrent to be it's completly own game, with as much ties to D&D as Rifts, Rolemaster, and Dark age Vampire..



    Pathfinder isn't a clone, retro- or otherwise. Indeed, there's now much more in the game that is not derived from the 3.5e roots than that which was taken from those roots. Your description of it as a 'retroclone' is no more accurate than a description of Pathfinder as "the true D&D". Given that both are inflamatory statements attacking one side in the "system wars", can you not see a certain irony in your position?
    You know I had this same arguement in the hackmaster thread, I don't know what people take as insulting about the term retro clone, Myth and Magic, and Castile and Crusaders, the B one that are all letters all take the term fine. They all have mechanics.not found in there edtions of d&d, and they would kill for piazo level exceptance.

    So fine what term should I use for a game based on continueing a.previuse edtion of D&D?

    Pathfinder the awsome game is great, Pathfinder the fantasy rpg that might unseat d&d as top rpg is no more a problem today then white wolf was in the 90's. Pathfinder being the one true spirit of D&D is BS... It has no more right to that claim then Myth and Magic.


    Just the fact that every other spinoff game (is that better then retro clone?) put togather has less arguements with 4e fans on WotC web site in a year then pathfinder does in a week shows a current amount of problem.

    Ever since the playtest
    I'm with D&D...Any Edition

 

  • #62
    Registered User
    Cutpurse (Lvl 5)

    jasper's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    montgomery al
    Posts
    1,534

    ø Ignore jasper
    Hi mouseateers!
    Hi MIckey!
    Today, Donald, Goofy, and I are exploring the
    TOMB OF HORRORS! Come join us in the fun!
    YEA! MICKEY!
    [insert commerical break with new Tomb of horrors ride replacing the Pirates of Caribeeian Yawn!]
    Bad players ruin any game. That includes RPG, online, sports, poker and pretend.

  • #63
    Registered User
    Magsman (Lvl 14)

    Hobo's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Michigan S. S. R.
    Posts
    18,967
    Blog Entries
    20

    ø Ignore Hobo
    Quote Originally Posted by GMforPowergamers View Post
    Well I loved Mutants and Masterminds, I belive they are doing better work by becomeing less like D20... However for the last few years piazo fans (and even one employee) have tried to claim there D&D retroclone is the true D&D. I have gotten very sick of hearing the edtion wariing that now has become system waring.
    And you think getting rid of the OGL, if that were even possible which of course it isn't, would improve that? If anything, that'll only make it even more obnoxious.
    WHEN I sit to play a game I have a large group of games to choose from, rifts, shadow run, deadlands, WoD, Rifts, Star wars D6, plus a few others... or D&D... I liked alot of what piazo did in 3.5, and think they have some of (if not the) best adventures. However I am sick of being called out on pathfinder being true d&d, and 4e is dune.
    Maybe you should hang out with some different people. That's a very small and shrill subset of the population. I don't see anyone making that claim, because I avoid the obnoxious posters. But it's easy to do; there's very few of them, all things considered.
    Now in my mind Pathfinder is the leading retroclone, the most successful retro clone, and it has the best support of any retroclone, but when I hate the spite and bile thrown at 4e (it is even a little at nexr) and WoTC.
    That's not really what's meant by the term retroclone. Pathfinder isn't one at all.
    I would be just as happy if every jerk woke up tomorro saying "oh man why do I make others so angry" but I think the odds of that and the ogl going away are about the same
    You want the OGL to go away, thus taking away the enjoyment of thousands of gamers (not to mention the livelihood of folks like Green Ronin and Paizo) all because of a handful of obnoxious Paizo fans who say that Pathfinder is true D&D and that makes you angry?

    Maybe instead of wishing that nobody would make you angry for stupid reasons, you should invest in some anger management or something.

    "I realize that I am generalizing here, but, as is often the case when I generalize, I don't care." Dave Barry

  • #64
    Registered User
    Grandmaster of Flowers (Lvl 18)

    delericho's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Falkirk
    Posts
    7,484
    I Defended The Walls!

    ø Ignore delericho
    Quote Originally Posted by GMforPowergamers View Post
    I think that all it would do is force pathfinder 2e witch would be just enough diffrent to be it's completly own game, with as much ties to D&D as Rifts, Rolemaster, and Dark age Vampire..
    That would depend on whether the OGL door drifts shut or slams shut. If it slams shut, that at best means Paizo have to do a rush job on PF2.0, leading to substandard game. At worst, and more likely, it kills them stone dead.

    But even the "drifts shut" option does nobody any favours. There's no appetite, either amongst PF players or even from Paizo, for a second edition at this time, never mind one that is significantly different. It is the very similarities to D&D 3.5e that are the major draw of the game. An enforced edition change would, I don't doubt, be accepted by the PF fans... but it's not a good outcome for anyone.

    You know I had this same arguement in the hackmaster thread, I don't know what people take as insulting about the term retro clone
    Well, it implies a lack of creative effort. But that's not really important - the term is inaccurate, and if you're going to object to Pathfinder being called "the true D&D" (or whatever) then you really should be adopting the same standard in your own terminology. Pathfinder is no more a retroclone than Star Wars d20, or d20 Modern... or 4e for that matter.

    So fine what term should I use for a game based on continueing a.previuse edtion of D&D?
    For the most part, I'd suggest referring to them by name. Failing that, spinoff games works, as would near-D&D.

    But, to be honest, I don't mind Pathfinder either being counted amongst the editions of D&D or being counted as a retro-clone. Neither is actually accurate, but both have enough of a grain of truth that people will know what's being talked about.

    What I do find problematic, though, is an objection to the one that simultaneously makes use of the other. Either both are acceptable, or neither.

    Pathfinder the awsome game is great, Pathfinder the fantasy rpg that might unseat d&d as top rpg is no more a problem today then white wolf was in the 90's. Pathfinder being the one true spirit of D&D is BS... It has no more right to that claim then Myth and Magic.
    All true.

    Just the fact that every other spinoff game (is that better then retro clone?) put togather has less arguements with 4e fans on WotC web site in a year then pathfinder does in a week shows a current amount of problem.
    Eh, if Pathfinder wasn't top dog, the arguments would be about Hackmaster instead, or DCC, or C&C, or whatever. Provided there was any one serious competitor to 4e, those arguments were inevitable.

    It's just a tribalism thing. In Glasgow you get exactly the same tenor of debate over Ranger v Celtic (although with added death threats). On other sites (or even this one), you can guarantee long threads by posting tirades about the Star Wars prequels. Or Star Wars v Star Trek. Or Kirk v Picard. Or Coke v Pepsi. And don't get me started on politics...

    Basically, there are a handful of hugely emotive topics where people instinctively pick sides, and they're going to fight their corner. And the less important the issue actually is, the more emotive the discussions tend to get, and the dirtier the fight is liable to be.

    There comes a point where you just have to shake your head, comment that "somebody is wrong on the internet", and tune it out. Otherwise, insanity beckons.

    Incidentally, it's quite likely that the Edition Wars have actually been good for sales of both Pathfinder and 4e. That's a massive, ongoing tide of free advertising right there. (Note that that presupposes they both existed, and that had the same relative levels of acceptance... just without the controversy. Obviously, had Pathfinder not existed at all, things would have been hugely different for 4e.)

  • #65
    Registered User
    Magsman (Lvl 14)

    Hobo's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Michigan S. S. R.
    Posts
    18,967
    Blog Entries
    20

    ø Ignore Hobo
    I prefer to say that Pathfinder is part of the d20 family of games. Retroclone specifically refers to the use of the OGL to "back-engineer" a version of D&D that is not open; either 1e, or BD&D or OD&D--and the growing family of variants that spun off from that initiative. Using retroclone in any other sense doesn't make sense to me; the term was coined specifically to refer to that movement, and OSRIC, S&W, LL, etc.

    "I realize that I am generalizing here, but, as is often the case when I generalize, I don't care." Dave Barry

  • #66
    Registered User
    Minor Trickster (Lvl 4)

    varden's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    47

    ø Ignore varden
    Quote Originally Posted by marv View Post
    Ah, but you forget the DnD industry leader, protected by a solid open license. I am speaking of course about Paizo. DnD lives in Pathfinder by a small company that cares about gamers.
    Edition wars, Marv? Really?
    Last edited by varden; Thursday, 8th November, 2012 at 02:46 PM. Reason: ...

  • #67
    The only argument I could see in favor of removing the OGL is that one could argue (I'm not sure I would agree with it, personally), that the 3.5 license being easily accessible stifles creativity, in that RPG developers have this proven "engine" they can just stick their game on, and are likely to do that rather than try to push the envelope.

    To use a video game example; think of how many MMOs rip off of WoW, or FPS games that are poorly revamped Call of Duty games.

    That said; I was just curious. Should a bigger company ever acquire Hasbro / D&D, I'd have to think finding a way to remove the OGL would be the lawyers' first priority.

  • #68
    Registered User
    Magsman (Lvl 14)

    Hobo's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Michigan S. S. R.
    Posts
    18,967
    Blog Entries
    20

    ø Ignore Hobo
    Arguably that did happen, early in the wave of OGL products. In any case, the OGL was specifically designed so that it can't be removed, no matter how much of a priority it is. The only way around it is to come up with something so much better that it leaves the OGL behind as a relict of history.

    "I realize that I am generalizing here, but, as is often the case when I generalize, I don't care." Dave Barry

  • #69
    Registered User
    Myrmidon (Lvl 10)

    drothgery's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    10,235
    Blog Entries
    3

    ø Ignore drothgery
    It's not legally possible, AFAICT (though IANAL), but I think it would be in the best interest of D&D and of WotC if they could retroactively pull the d20 SRD out from under the OGL. I don't believe it's possible to make a game that can be recognized as D&D that can't be reverse-engineered from the d20 SRD and raw mechanics, and that means every future version of D&D will have to contend with legal knock-offs of older editions.
    Dave Rothgery

    PBP
    Spoiler:

    My EnWorld Blog
    Republic and Empire
    Buffverse M&M game

    Characters
    Active
    Sanne Bacher d'Lyrandar in S@squ@tch's Against the Giants - Team Black

    Inactive
    Istara Kandorian in Ankh-Morpork Guard's Star Wars: Rebels with Style
    Eric Hassel (Quarterback) in Jemal's Mutant High
    Sariel in Rumspringa's Keep on the Shadowfell
    Khalia ir'Indari in DEFCON1's Eye of the Lich Queen
    Serrana Vao in Karl Green's Knights of the Old Republic (with 213 things Serrana can't do in the Jedi Order)
    Italimelk in Living ENWorld
    Daellin ir'Ayellan in stonegod's Expedition to Castle Ravenloft
    drothgery's Victorian Eberron game
    Star Wars/KotOR Era - The Second K'ril Incursion

  • #70
    Registered User
    Defender (Lvl 8)

    Nellisir's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Ithaca, NY
    Posts
    3,755
    Blog Entries
    7

    ø Ignore Nellisir
    Quote Originally Posted by Cybit View Post
    The only argument I could see in favor of removing the OGL is that one could argue (I'm not sure I would agree with it, personally), that the 3.5 license being easily accessible stifles creativity, in that RPG developers have this proven "engine" they can just stick their game on, and are likely to do that rather than try to push the envelope.
    I wrote a post several years ago outlining the evolving use of the OGL (IMO). In sum, WotC overestimated how fast and to what extent OGL products would diversify off of the d20 core mechanics. There was much less diversity than expected for a very long time, and much of what diversity there was, particularly in RPG systems, came from one company - Green Ronin.
    Whether that is good or bad depends on your thinking, and I'm not sure there's a right answer. I think understanding of the d20 mechanics by designers (everywhere, not just at companies) took at least several years, if not half a decade or longer, to really mature, and real innovation wasn't possible until that was accomplished.

    On the flip side, the d20 system is popular. There's no percentage in being different for the sake of being different. You need to be -better- in -some- fashion. People built on the d20 system because they liked it, and other people liked it, and they continue to use it because the basic system is reliable and understood.

    That said; I was just curious. Should a bigger company ever acquire Hasbro / D&D, I'd have to think finding a way to remove the OGL would be the lawyers' first priority.
    First off, not going to happen.
    Second, people misunderstand the OGL. The OGL allows other people to use your copyrighted material. It does not revoke your copyright, or give you control of theirs.

    OK, I tried to posit results of "rescinding" the OGL, but it fell off the logic table so fast I can't do it. The OGL is an agreement that all parties willingly and publically entered into. Rescinding it would be like going back to the house your parent were born in and claiming, four owners later, that it and everything currently in it are yours. It's nonsensical, impossible, and would poison the entire gaming community against whoever did it. I doubt any company in the world is as image-conscious as Disney. They're not going to lead off by shutting down the leading RPG company in hopes it will make people love them.

    If you want a reasonable paranoia, think about Disney buying Paizo. Much, much simpler.

    And Pathfinder really does become the "true" spirit of D&D.

    PS - 4e is Dune? With sandworms?
    Secrets of the Shadowend - Notes, scribblings, writings, and memorandum on the Shadowend Campaign Setting.

  • + Log in or register to post
    Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. Replies: 5
      Last Post: Monday, 12th November, 2012, 12:37 AM
    2. Rumour Mill: Disney and Hasbro
      By Kaodi in forum Miscellaneous Geek Talk & Media Lounge
      Replies: 2
      Last Post: Tuesday, 6th November, 2012, 01:02 PM
    3. Disney Sniffing Around Hasbro?
      By Mark CMG in forum RPGs & Tabletop Gaming Discussion
      Replies: 3
      Last Post: Tuesday, 6th November, 2012, 02:03 AM
    4. Disney Sniffing Around Hasbro?
      By Morrus in forum RPGs & Tabletop Gaming Discussion
      Replies: 4
      Last Post: Tuesday, 6th November, 2012, 02:03 AM
    5. Ok, Disney's not so bad after all...
      By Nuclear Platypus in forum Miscellaneous Geek Talk & Media Lounge
      Replies: 10
      Last Post: Sunday, 17th September, 2006, 09:05 PM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •