Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder outselling D&D

[Theo R Cwithin]

I'm happy that your group doesn't have the problems that have been discussed here, but that hardly makes it anything more than a personal preference. And that's fine and everything, just don't elevate your preference to some sort of "the market has spoken" phenomenon.

Yup: it's a personal preference, reflective of people's playstyles and experience with various aspects of the a particular game-- which, of course, is why we see different "problems" and disagree on what it means to "fix" them.

I'd argue, though, that the market is speaking: PF and 4e are both apparently selling comparably, and there are a few other fairly popular games in the next tier, so clearly quite a few people are playing something. Whether that's because of or in spite of these games' respective "flaws" or "design" or something else entirely, no one actually knows....

 

[Nagol]

I am not familiar with either system. What do you think in the changes caused players to balk?

In WoD, the new rules are arguably a better set of rules (cleaner, easier to use and understand, simpler), but the players balked at the loss of atmosphere and canon.

The Hero revolt was pretty much the opposite.

The Hero system is a toolkit more than a RPG. There is no default world; there is little atmosphere in the basic rules. The rules exist to allow the GM and player group to design a world and build characters that fit the agreed genre that are reasonably comparable in effectiveness. Originally a superhero game, the Hero system typically has complex character design and the capacity to build a character that can do pretty much what you envision though sometimes the costs are higher than you're willing (or able) to pay.

From memory, the Fuzion system was much simpler, clunky, and could emulate less than the rule system it was replacing. The player base for Hero was self-selected to appreciate the character design; the Fuzion system took much of that joy away and didn't replace it with anything the base liked or needed.

It may be that the Fuzion system was simpler to understand and more likely to be played by newbies to the system (one of the common complaints against Hero). That ease may even have been able to grow the player pool past what its current base in time. But the game base didn't want it and the New Millenium was quickly followed by a book using the old Hero system despite what the designers were saying at launch.

 

[TheUltramark]

[MENTION=73683]Dannager[/MENTION]

well, you win. Myself and every other 4e player are ridiculous, ignorant and clearly in the minority, and suffer the shame of playing the inferior game, both in substance and popularity.

Are we done with this yet?

 

[Nagol]

[MENTION=73683]Dannager[/MENTION]

well, you win. Myself and every other 4e player are ridiculous, ignorant and clearly in the minority, and suffer the shame of playing the inferior game, both in substance and popularity.

Are we done with this yet?

Wait, I thought Dannager was supporting 4e and its expansion into the virtual world as the natural and noble successor to the RPG marketplace and it would displace all other games as those who resisted were slowly assimilated. Did I get that backwards?

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Wait, I thought Dannager was supporting 4e and its expansion into the virtual world as the natural and noble successor to the RPG marketplace and it would displace all other games as those who resisted were slowly assimilated. Did I get that backwards?

No, you're right. It is just hard to tell because the SUV had tinted windows.

The Auld Grump

 

[ShinHakkaider]

[MENTION=73683]Dannager[/MENTION]

well, you win. Myself and every other 4e player are ridiculous, ignorant and clearly in the minority, and suffer the shame of playing the inferior game, both in substance and popularity.

Are we done with this yet?

D00d, I think youre totally missing the mark on this one.

Dannager is one of the biggest 4E boosters on ENworld and Paizo. He utterly despises Paizo fans and his contempt for Pathfinder and 3x is barely restrained beneath his "polite" veneer.

You guys are DEFINITELY on the same side.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I dunno... those books are pretty big, and some gamers are pretty scrawny.

Hey! That was only the one time!

And it was a bookshelf, not the table!

The Auld Grump, we Pathfinder players are less scrawny - the books are heavier, so we build muscle faster!

 

[Chainsaw Mage]

I could create a "game" in which I push a button and the other three players lose. It wouldn't be much of a game, and I probably wouldn't find it terribly enjoyable, but conceivably someone terribly excited by the potential power trip could come along and claim that it's a great game . . .

Someone did in fact make this game . . .

 

[gamerprinter]

And this is, as we've been over, a poor way to design a game. You are designing it in such a way that a given character feels underwhelming for months or years, and then feels overwhelming for months or years after that. It is likely that, prior to the point at which the switch happens, the spellcaster's player isn't having as much fun as he might otherwise have, and it is similarly likely that, after the point at which the switch happens, the other members of the party who are not spellcasters are not having as much fun as they might otherwise have.

This sort of "low-resolution" game design strikes me as having relatively low levels of appeal to the market at large, and that's why I deride it as an example of poor game design.

But in my entire D&D gaming career (since 1977) I've never wanted to play the wizard, and not for power reasons, but flavor alone. The wizard schtick has never appealed to me. The only time I've played a wizard is when I show up to a group that doesn't have a spellcaster in the party and that's been like 5 times over 32 years. I much more rather play a fighter, paladin, ranger, rogue, or bard.

And I've never felt upstaged by the high level wizard or felt a lack of fun, its been fun from 1st to whatever our end level was...

Some people might feel this is so, but some people is not all people and there is no real way to measure how any group of gamers prefer anything to anything - there are no statistics on this, just guesses and hardly educational guesses. Nobody knows. Certainly not you nor I.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

D00d, I think youre totally missing the mark on this one.
[..snip..]
You guys are DEFINITELY on the same side.

Heh, I thought TheUltramark was being ironic!
Even if not, he both enjoys 4e, and is of the "play what you like" mindset. Seems to me he's aligned with the normal gamers who enjoy their preferred games just because they like it.