-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 4E 4e vs. Paizo: Mommy, Daddy, please stop fighting!
- Thread starter fireinthedust
- Start date
Charwoman Gene
Adventurer
If you know full well that freelancers can work for both companies it is disingenuous of you to mention WotC's non-compete policy for EMPLOYEES while implying it applies to freelancers.
James Jacobs
Adventurer
I wasn't implying that at all, and if I did, it wasn't intentional. Your first quote from me does quote me as saying that "an employee of WotC cannot write for another company." A freelancer is not an employee of WotC. Further, as far as I know, WotC does not currently employ staff artists or staff cartographers. Where as a fair amount of the words in a WotC product are created by their staff, very few (if any) of their maps or art are. Again... it's been 6 or so years since I worked there and a lot could have changed in that time.
Betote
First Post
It's me or, more than "Parent* Paizo, Parent WotC, please stop fighting", it looks like "Parent Paizo, please come back home. Parent WotC doesn't know how to cook"*.
If I were James, Erik, Lisa or Jason, I'd be pretty tired right now of being accused of one thing or another because of the numbers written on my books. Get over it, folks. They use those numbers because they are their numbers, and no matter how cool it would be for you, it's their decision. And I think they have been in the business long enough to know better than sticking to a wrong decision for fear of the nerd rage.
Paizo is a company which publishes a RPG. WotC is a company which publishes a RPG. Steve Jackson Games is a company which publishes a RPG. Different companies, different games. Buy whatever you like.
* used to avoid being called a sexist for choosing "mommy" or "daddy" for any of the roles
If I were James, Erik, Lisa or Jason, I'd be pretty tired right now of being accused of one thing or another because of the numbers written on my books. Get over it, folks. They use those numbers because they are their numbers, and no matter how cool it would be for you, it's their decision. And I think they have been in the business long enough to know better than sticking to a wrong decision for fear of the nerd rage.
Paizo is a company which publishes a RPG. WotC is a company which publishes a RPG. Steve Jackson Games is a company which publishes a RPG. Different companies, different games. Buy whatever you like.
* used to avoid being called a sexist for choosing "mommy" or "daddy" for any of the roles
fireinthedust
Explorer
[sblock=Sexist] I believe you mean "gender biased" or "homophobic" (or LGTBQ-phobic) rather than sexist. I'm not implying that either gender is more likely to argue, simply that it is a metaphor for the fight. However, please don't confuse the subject... and the readers, with innaccurate labels? It degrades the OP intent. [/sblock]
[/sblock]
Or, you know, he could simply have gotten it screwed up. It isn't like people don't make mistakes on occasion. If it was an accident, you've now needlessly insulted someone by saying they were misrepresenting the situation intentionally.
Folks, please don't attribute motives to other posters.
fireinthedust
Explorer
James Jacobs: Thanks! I remember at GenCon Indy 05, I ran into acouple WOTC artists, and one of them said pay was by the picture, so that makes sense.
I totally understand where you're coming from with enjoying 3.x/pf, so I'm just glad you lot are out there. Admittedly, I enjoy 4e (I've said as much) but for the grownup group I DM for Pathfinder really hits the tone and setting-style I enjoy. Tis loverly ground fer plunderin', sez oy!
On the other hand, I just played a game with my Neice. Her first game. She was playing Candyland, so I said "who would you be in Candyland?" Her response: "Um, I like Gumdrops, so I'll be... Gumdrop Gracie!" Her mum and I get visual migrainse from sugar, she likes fuzzy peaches, so she was "Fuzzy Aurora", whose quest was to find the fabled "Vegetables" (pronounced to rhyme with Fuggedables, like mobsters saying "forget about it"). They defeated Lord Licorice by throwing chocolate-colored nuts at him and his Gobble-ins, and save Princess Frostine and Lolly. My neice was surprised when I told her she'd just effectively played her first RPG. She can't wait til next time, when they go exploring "Fairytale Land", next door to Candyland.
So we RP'd a game with her and her mum not 10 minutes ago. Instead of dice (none handy) we used the Candyland cards, with a range of six, high being a hit (green, orange, blue).
I bring this up because it was the setting that really caught her imagination. Among others (some 4e) Pathfinder is really catching mine.
For me and my adult group, I love DMing a darker setting with lots of ambiguity and complexity, which Pathfinder can provide (though I assimilate it into what I've already done as a setting). I could do the same thing one night, with Candyland cards even, and my group could have a good time. 4e I enjoy, 3e I enjoy, and I'm looking forward to reading 3.pf anyway. But I (personally, and it's a preference, and the reason I posted this thread) find 4e is easier on me to run a complete game, numbers-wise.
Before anyone jumps on my head, consider that I broke down RPGs to a kid who's 8, smart but still younger than the expected 11+ age range for Piaget's Formal-Operational stage (involving abstract reasoning skills and rationalizing said concepts), which just happens to be the suggested age for D&D of, I think, any edition (it was in 2e, when I started).
Really, there are two major elements that any group enjoys (I think):
1) the setting to draw them in, and 2) doing something, or accomplishing something, with a risk factor in it. 2 needs 1 to allow 2 to mean anything.
DMs like me also enjoy production value and quick-fix aides to running a game smoothly, but that's beside the point. Whatever I run, I need to be into it, or at least have enough that I can convince my players to jump into it.
I could do that breakdown for kids with 3e, or 3.pf (I'm that good), I guess. I use 4e for many reasons, just like I'm moving towards a simple-system kid game for my neice and co, one of which is I don't have to think about numbers. Also 4e has a character and monster generator in DDI, a great cheat.
But, as I've said, Pathfinder has the instant-draw factor. It's the setting I would want to be in, in a lot of ways, and it's incredibly rich.
I totally understand where you're coming from with enjoying 3.x/pf, so I'm just glad you lot are out there. Admittedly, I enjoy 4e (I've said as much) but for the grownup group I DM for Pathfinder really hits the tone and setting-style I enjoy. Tis loverly ground fer plunderin', sez oy!
On the other hand, I just played a game with my Neice. Her first game. She was playing Candyland, so I said "who would you be in Candyland?" Her response: "Um, I like Gumdrops, so I'll be... Gumdrop Gracie!" Her mum and I get visual migrainse from sugar, she likes fuzzy peaches, so she was "Fuzzy Aurora", whose quest was to find the fabled "Vegetables" (pronounced to rhyme with Fuggedables, like mobsters saying "forget about it"). They defeated Lord Licorice by throwing chocolate-colored nuts at him and his Gobble-ins, and save Princess Frostine and Lolly. My neice was surprised when I told her she'd just effectively played her first RPG. She can't wait til next time, when they go exploring "Fairytale Land", next door to Candyland.
So we RP'd a game with her and her mum not 10 minutes ago. Instead of dice (none handy) we used the Candyland cards, with a range of six, high being a hit (green, orange, blue).
I bring this up because it was the setting that really caught her imagination. Among others (some 4e) Pathfinder is really catching mine.
For me and my adult group, I love DMing a darker setting with lots of ambiguity and complexity, which Pathfinder can provide (though I assimilate it into what I've already done as a setting). I could do the same thing one night, with Candyland cards even, and my group could have a good time. 4e I enjoy, 3e I enjoy, and I'm looking forward to reading 3.pf anyway. But I (personally, and it's a preference, and the reason I posted this thread) find 4e is easier on me to run a complete game, numbers-wise.
Before anyone jumps on my head, consider that I broke down RPGs to a kid who's 8, smart but still younger than the expected 11+ age range for Piaget's Formal-Operational stage (involving abstract reasoning skills and rationalizing said concepts), which just happens to be the suggested age for D&D of, I think, any edition (it was in 2e, when I started).
Really, there are two major elements that any group enjoys (I think):
1) the setting to draw them in, and 2) doing something, or accomplishing something, with a risk factor in it. 2 needs 1 to allow 2 to mean anything.
DMs like me also enjoy production value and quick-fix aides to running a game smoothly, but that's beside the point. Whatever I run, I need to be into it, or at least have enough that I can convince my players to jump into it.
I could do that breakdown for kids with 3e, or 3.pf (I'm that good
), I guess. I use 4e for many reasons, just like I'm moving towards a simple-system kid game for my neice and co, one of which is I don't have to think about numbers. Also 4e has a character and monster generator in DDI, a great cheat.But, as I've said, Pathfinder has the instant-draw factor. It's the setting I would want to be in, in a lot of ways, and it's incredibly rich.
MichaelSomething
Legend
Why do people want RPG designers to fight each other? There's RPG designers! If they do fight, they'll end up making 2nd Edition characters and have them fight each other.
BryonD
Hero
True, but that would be nothing compared to what 4E fans would do if WotC moved away from "simple to DM".
It cuts both ways.
Similar Threads
