Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Disney Sniffing Around Hasbro?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 6044281" data-attributes="member: 22424"><p>That would depend on whether the OGL door drifts shut or slams shut. If it slams shut, that <em>at best</em> 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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, it implies a lack of creative effort. But that's not really important - the term is <em>inaccurate</em>, 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.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>For the most part, I'd suggest referring to them by name. Failing that, spinoff games works, as would near-D&D.</p><p></p><p>But, to be honest, I don't mind Pathfinder either being counted amongst the editions of D&D <em>or</em> 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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>All true.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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 <em>long</em> 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...</p><p></p><p>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 <em>actually</em> is, the more emotive the discussions tend to get, and the dirtier the fight is liable to be.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="delericho, post: 6044281, member: 22424"] That would depend on whether the OGL door drifts shut or slams shut. If it slams shut, that [i]at best[/i] 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. Well, it implies a lack of creative effort. But that's not really important - the term is [i]inaccurate[/i], 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. 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 [i]or[/i] 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. All true. 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 [i]long[/i] 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 [i]actually[/i] 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.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Disney Sniffing Around Hasbro?
Top