Pathfinder 1E Wizkids should take the Pathfinder 1.0 ruleset and publish their own RPG.

[Aldarc]

I think PbtA and Fate can be used to tell any story. System doesn't matter.

Okay, and that may apply for your expriences. However, I don't think that is true in my experiences, and the creators of Fate also did not believe that it's true. Since @Imaro is here, hopefully he can verify past conversations we had, where he said that Fate could not necessarily be used for the same stories as D&D due to differences in how players engaged with the rule and the requirements that the system made of them. We can likewise find people who feel that 5e does not really engage how they tell stories while preferring rules from prior editions of D&D or OSR fantasy heartbreakers.

I am sure the mechanics in Adventures in Middle Earth, Esper Genesis and Ultramodern5 to name a few are a complete retread with lots of reskinned ideas and mechanics. I am sure that all of the standalone 5e powered rpgs that don't require the core rules to run them are just a retreading of similar ideas with reskinned ideas and mechanics. I am sure none of these products are just doing the same thing with little actual mechanical innovation.

I had a number of these other games in mind when I originally made my statement. I don't find them particularly innovative, though that is not a slight on how fun they may be.

Then continue playing those systems. And since it is bothering you so much get out of playing 5e. Our group did that. And we are all the more happier for it.

Hopefully you can recognize how this is a non-sequitor response to my concern, because it seems to address something other than what's being discussed.

(1) "I am concerned with the effect that 5e has on the market..."
(2) "Stop playing 5e and play something else."

The advice in (2) does not follow consequentially from the issue of (1) at all because I have not expressed any actual fatigue or disdain for playing 5e.

Or consider this comparable statement:
(1) "I am concerned with the effect that WoW has on the MMORPG market..."
(2) "Stop playing WoW and play something else..."

I can still be having fun playing WoW while still being concerned about the effects that WoW has on the MMORPG market in terms of the diversity, creativity, and innovation of other MMORPGs. Telling me to stop playing WoW and play something else strikes me as false wisdom that comes from a failure to adequately listen and respond to what was actually being said.

Here you go a collection of subtle and not so subtle digs at 5e that you made while arguing it can't do everything...

Now watch the squirming begin in how these aren't attacks...

Imaro, these are not attacks against 5e nor is this me squirming. We should probably strike that bit of confirmation bias out. If this is the best you got for what constitutes an attack, then it's abundantly clear that you are making mountains out of molehills, looking for offense where there is none, which is one of the problems that I previously highlighted. I said that 5e is good for what it does, and I enjoy playing it for those purposes. That does not somehow mandate that the system be brilliant, beyond reproach, or require me to jettison out the window my concerns about 5e's potential effects in the hobby.

Again, consider what @Jer had said earlier. Chicken nuggets are fairly mediocre, but saying that they are mediocre is not an attack against chicken nuggets. Chicken nuggets can be yummy and enjoyable while still being mediocre.

but again what is @Parmandur defending (your words not mine) against if all you said was 5e isn't good for everything??

Misconstrued slights that they are imagining that I am making against 5e, much like the strawmen you seem hellbent on creating.

 

[Parmandur]

I think concern about a monoculture is good. Though at this point. I think it’s mostly unwarranted. Maybe.

Also I think on the whole scale, system doesn’t matter, but for the individual it most certainly can, and on the average across rpg gamers it does.

Eh, the RPG scene is more diverse and larger than ever. 5E is most of the pie, but the pie is bigger.

System can contribute to the flavor of a game, but it is a tool, or seasoning, not determinate or substantial.

 

[Parmandur]

Okay, and that may apply for your expriences. However, I don't think that is true in my experiences, and the creators of Fate also did not believe that it's true.

The creator of FATE might feel that, but the marketplace doesn't agree: people are doing everything with FATE.

 

[Imaro]

This is getting silly. I play 5e, I enjoy it, but does this mean I can't be critical of how it is swamping the hobby? This has always been a problem with D&D. And when it gets out of hand, yes, it eats away at other companies, which is too bad. That's what we're saying. Right now there are lots of other games, but it's a concern.

Eh, if people want to spend money, time and energy to play other games they will... with the internet anyone who cared to look even a little bit can easily make themselves aware of other games... if people want to play 5e exclusively... they will and it's their prerogative...

The only problem arises when some people want to act like it's their responsibility to enlighten (forcibly if necessary) the poor, ignorant masses on the "better" systems out there because their favorite system(s) aren't as popular as D&D 5e. Honestly I think most people could care less what rule system they are using if they are having a good time (this being key most players don't get into the minutia... for them a game is either fun or it's not fun and they aren't going to critically analyze it's system to figure out why.) and for the vast majority of players it's a bigger turn off from the hobby to have to continuously learn new rules, procedures, character creation, etc (as well as buy ANOTHER core rulebook) for what is for many/most a leisure pastime and social gathering... just saying.

EDIT: And this is from someone who has played and collected numerous systems... I just realize I'm probably an outlier in that the vast majority of people playing D&D right now are not looking to have a library of rpg's in their den.

 

[Xenonnonex]

I had a number of these other games in mind when I originally made my statement. I don't find them particularly innovative, though that is not a slight on how fun they may be.

What are these other games?
Even though you do not find them subjectively innovative does not mean they are not objectively innovative. I know that AIME has mechanics and solutions that are not found in 5e.

Hopefully you can recognize how this is a non-sequitor response to my concern, because it seems to address something other than what's being discussed.

(1) "I am concerned with the effect that 5e has on the market..."
(2) "Stop playing 5e and play something else."

The advice in (2) does not follow consequentially from the issue of (1) at all because I have not expressed any actual fatigue or disdain for playing 5e.

And the players who bring well written and well developed 3pp material for your 5e games. What happens then? Do they just get kicked to the side because of your fatigue and disdain for 5e potentially borgifying the market?

 

[Aldarc]

The creator of FATE might feel that, but the marketplace doesn't agree: people are doing everything with FATE.

I'm sure it would surprise you to learn that I disagree with this assertion. I had mentioned it before, but you seem to use the "same stories" more along the lines of aesthetics: e.g., "the story takes place in ancient Rome." To that much I agree. You will certainly find that there are a number of versions of Fate that adopt these different aesthetics of genre. But this is not equivalent to saying that Fate can do everything, much less do everything well.

However, I think that apart from the aesthetics, the sort of stories engendered from these systems are fairly different. I say this because of what the system asks the players to do differs between games, which affects the decision-making process. Plus, just because people are making different things for Fate does not mean that they are appropriate for it, hence why Rob Donoghue voiced opposition to the idea that Fate should be recommended for everything. The creators of Fate, for example, are fairly upfront about what Fate is good for: pulp and proactive, competent characters with dramatic lives.

And I think that a fairly good way to highlight how people cannot do everything with Fate is to summon @Lanefan, with whom I had many prior discussions about how the Fate system is not conducive for telling the same stories he prefers. Fate is not designed for many of the things that Lanefan wants out of his game. Fate is not designed for zero-to-hero narratives. It's not designed for exploration and dungeon crawls. It's not a game about rewarding good tactical play, players engaging an in-universe resource management minigame, or solving puzzles. And sort of the action declarations that a player can make or encouraged to make will differ between games. (@Lanefan has expressed similar issues and reservations with games like Dungeon World and Blades in the Dark.) You really can't use Fate to run D&D style fantasy, though there are supplements that try, including the nearly ubiquitous Freeport conversion.

That said, Fate is more akin to GURPS than D&D, a broad tool set rather than a coherent system. At its core is the Fudge mechanic with the addition of aspects and fate points. Most everything else is optional, including skills. So there is a fairly big gulf in terms of the relative crunch between Fate Accelerated and something like Mindjammer.

The only problem arises when some people want to act like it's their responsibility to enlighten (forcibly if necessary) the poor, ignorant masses on the "better" systems out there because their favorite system(s) aren't as popular as D&D 5e. Honestly I think most people could care less what rule system they are using if they are having a good time (this being key most players don't get into the minutia... for them a game is either fun or it's not fun and they aren't going to critically analyze it's system to figure out why.) and for the vast majority of players it's a bigger turn off from the hobby to have to continuously learn new rules, procedures, character creation, etc for what is a leisure pastime and social gathering... just saying.

My experiences are circumstantial and anecedotal. I can freely admit that. But through those experiences I have often found myself repeatedly engaging with people who wanted to create/convert/adapt something for 5e that required changing 5e to do something cumbersomely that it was not really well designed to do and where other pre-existing systems tended to do better at that very thing they expressed wanting their 5e game to do.

I don't think there would be much opposition to the idea that if someone, for example, wanted to run a game that simulates an investigative Cthulhu story for 5e, many on this forum would probably first propose that they consider using CoC rather than adopt that for 5e.

Edit: @Xenonnonex, you may want to edit the quotes in your post. These things can admittedly get a bit wonky on the new boards.

 

[Umbran]

I will make this a general note - play nice.

There is a very, very strong tendency for people to become tribal about games - attacking and defending them. The discourse is structured such that nobody can actually "win", and that gets frustrating. When frustrated, people make bad decisions, and start attacking each other.

And then moderators come in, and nobody is happy.

So, right now, recognize that, whatever your position, you will NOT win this argument. Consider whether it is worth it to you to continue given that fact.

If you are not prepared to treat each other as if you all, as people, are more important than the non-persons that are games, I strongly recommend you leave off this discussion now, or it will not end well.[/red]

 

[Parmandur]

I'm sure it would surprise you to learn that I disagree with this assertion. I had mentioned it before, but you seem to use the "same stories" more along the lines of aesthetics: e.g., "the story takes place in ancient Rome." To that much I agree. You will certainly find that there are a number of versions of Fate that adopt these different aesthetics of genre. But this is not equivalent to saying that Fate can do everything, much less do everything well.

However, I think that apart from the aesthetics, the sort of stories engendered from these systems are fairly different. I say this because of what the system asks the players to do differs between games, which affects the decision-making process. Plus, just because people are making different things for Fate does not mean that they are appropriate for it, hence why Rob Donoghue voiced opposition to the idea that Fate should be recommended for everything. The creators of Fate, for example, are fairly upfront about what Fate is good for: pulp and proactive, competent characters with dramatic lives.

And I think that a fairly good way to highlight how people cannot do everything with Fate is to summon @Lanefan, with whom I had many prior discussions about how the Fate system is not conducive for telling the same stories he prefers. Fate is not designed for many of the things that Lanefan wants out of his game. Fate is not designed for zero-to-hero narratives. It's not designed for exploration and dungeon crawls. It's not a game about rewarding good tactical play, players engaging an in-universe resource management minigame, or solving puzzles. And sort of the action declarations that a player can make or encouraged to make will differ between games. (@Lanefan has expressed similar issues and reservations with games like Dungeon World and Blades in the Dark.) You really can't use Fate to run D&D style fantasy, though there are supplements that try, including the nearly ubiquitous Freeport conversion.

That said, Fate is more akin to GURPS than D&D, a broad tool set rather than a coherent system. At its core is the Fudge mechanic with the addition of aspects and fate points. Most everything else is optional, including skills. So there is a fairly big gulf in terms of the relative crunch between Fate Accelerated and something like Mindjammer.

My experiences are circumstantial and anecedotal. I can freely admit that. But through those experiences I have often found myself repeatedly engaging with people who wanted to create/convert/adapt something for 5e that required changing 5e to do something cumbersomely that it was not really well designed to do and where other pre-existing systems tended to do better at that very thing they expressed wanting their 5e game to do.

I don't think there would be much opposition to the idea that if someone, for example, wanted to run a game that simulates an investigative Cthulhu story for 5e, many on this forum would probably first propose that they consider using CoC rather than adopt that for 5e.

Edit: @Xenonnonex, you may want to edit the quotes in your post. These things can admittedly get a bit wonky on the new boards.

Again, the creator of the game might feel that way, yet people disagree in practice, and the market has disproved the theory. Theory is one thing, practice where the rubber meets the road is another entirely.

 

[Xenonnonex]

Edit: @Xenonnonex, you may want to edit the quotes in your post. These things can admittedly get a bit wonky on the new boards.

Cheers bruv. Have fixed.

 

[Imaro]

I don't think there would be much opposition to the idea that if someone, for example, wanted to run a game that simulates an investigative Cthulhu story for 5e, many on this forum would probably first propose that they consider using CoC rather than adopt that for 5e.

But why? CoC is the BRP system with sanity and mythos monsters... why is it a better system than 5e using sanity from the DMG and creatures from the Far Realm for simulating an investigative Cthulhu story?

EDIT: And do those advantages offset cost in money, time, brainspace, familiarity, etc.?

EDIT 2: It's interesting you brought up this example as I am currently running this type of adventure to kick off a plane exploration campaign in my current game.