D&D General The Crab Bucket Fallacy

[FrozenNorth]

The decision to try to make PF2 a somewhat balanced, consistent, playable/'tactical' game, when the established fanbase of PF1 was seemingly there precisely because they rejected those qualities in 4e, has always baffled me. Yet PF2 is successful (by the standards of not-D&D). I guess Paizo really won a lot of loyalty? Either that or their fanbase cycled dramatically?

It’s the absence of warlords. 4e failed due solely to the presence of warlords and WotC was wise not to include them in 5e.

 

[payn]

The decision to try to make PF2 a somewhat balanced, consistent, playable/'tactical' game, when the established fanbase of PF1 was seemingly there precisely because they rejected those qualities in 4e, has always baffled me. Yet PF2 is successful (by the standards of not-D&D). I guess Paizo really won a lot of loyalty? Either that or their fanbase cycled dramatically?

I think the thing folks miss (purposely?) is that 5E grew the RPG community so much PF2 was able to be a success despite a lot going against what came before it.

The real interesting question is what PF2 would look like if 4E was still going? After that, will D&D ever go deeper into 4E design now that PF2 is rolling with the ORC?

 

[tetrasodium]

Hi! Apparently I'm no one. The 5e dmg is terrible to the point of actively causing problems for GMs in terms of what it does and does not include. Much of what a no one like me will note when engaging in the paradox of being a someone who reads a think no one reads it will become clear just how terrible much of the "solutions" to problems are as well as how frequently those solutions seem focused first and foremost on actively avoiding doing anything about a problem other than making it more difficult to fix by way of what is included or omitted.

after all these years does anyone still think that they are making reasoned points defending 5e by claiming the dmg solves things* and that the only problem is that people have not read the dmg★ or that they can't find it‡

*Usually it won't because it wouldn't have been raised or a specific solution would be reference ld with a particular section like "it has a variant/optional rule for that but it sucks like so" or the initial problem wouldn't have been raised.

★often they have read it, often more than once after you include the times they've looked for a thing or humored a fishing expedition. Of course they become a paradox after reading a think no one reads and no longer exist

‡ if it exists... often they have found it or know for certain that the relevant entry takes pains to enshrine that or some other problem. They know that for certain be fulfilling the paradox and blinking out of existence after becoming no one through the act of reading it.

 

[Evaniel]

Again, "the community"!!!!!!

Je suis l'etat.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The real interesting question is what PF2 would look like if 4E was still going? After that, will D&D ever go deeper into 4E design now that PF2 is rolling with the ORC?

I suppose in an alternate reality where everyone who hated 4e enough to engage in edition warring died of apoplexy (because we're just that old that we don't say coronary thrombosis, nor even heart attack) upon glancing at it, and Hasbro, while disappointed with it's sub-MMO revenue, let it linger on in some slow-release life-support mode until Stranger Things &c touched off the come-back, (newbs showing up expecting to roll to hit with a fireball would not be disappointment), and the Pandemic finally brought VTT adoption up to the levels it needed.... well, you might not have had a PF1... and if you did, PF2 would presumably have continued in the same vein of "more D&D than D&D."

OTOH, if the alternate reality 4e does OK because they just put out an OGL with it and kept Paizo on board, there'd definitely have been no PF1 or 2.

OTOOH, if 3.5 had been allowed a full dignified run of 10+ years like 1e, the fanbase might have been ready for a radical change with the next edition, and, coming out closer to the right time, 4e might even have met it's unrealistic goals ... by 2016 or so.... Tragically, tho, a 4e with exclusionary GSL timed to the come-back could have succeeded in driving the (now tired, 12+yo) OGL/SRD and 3pps sticking with it into the ground... and, alternate evil-genius Hasbro could then kill Paizo at whim... so no competing PH1...

(...I just can't do a nice alt.history... it's not in me, somehow....)

Either way, tho, the 50th anniversary edition would, I'm sure, be a different edition, not a timid don't-rock-the-boat nominal revision, as WotC would be equating success with radical change instead of tradition.

 

[Scribe]

Since 5E launched, I've been adjusting DCs down by 5 in default cases. If I have players who would do the Guidance + Help on every check, I'd look at adjusting them back.

So, we know that 14 (+2) Prof (+2) at level 1 - Moderate (DC 15) = 50% ya?

"Well thats too hard Scribe." OK, so you chop that down to the 'easy' DC of 10, and 'easy' becomes 5, which you...can now only fail on a natural 1 which seems...poor but whatever, thats how we are adjusting things.

So now Easy is so trivially done, why bother?

So that the Characters who have no stats or prof in a given task can do things easier? So we can give the Fighter a chance in Social?

Why?

 

[Thomas Shey]

It reminded me far too much of 4e (both in format and mechanics) for me to enjoy it. Combine that with a 3.5 player culture and its even worse for me.

None of that says it isn't a good game. It just says it isn't a good game for you.

 

[Thomas Shey]

It's not a good game for me, and how a given prospective user of a product feels about it is what matters.

No. How well it serves its intended audience matters. Anything else is tunnel vision.

 

[Thomas Shey]

The decision to try to make PF2 a somewhat balanced, consistent, playable/'tactical' game, when the established fanbase of PF1 was seemingly there precisely because they rejected those qualities in 4e, has always baffled me. Yet PF2 is successful (by the standards of not-D&D). I guess Paizo really won a lot of loyalty? Either that or their fanbase cycled dramatically?

There was never a lack of subset who wanted a game with less of the 3e era problems that PF1e had, and they had nowhere to go with the ones that didn't, since PF1e's publication level was so extensive. They could see if they could resell material to the already satisfied base, or try to get ones that weren't satisfied. They bet on the latter, and unlike the 4e experience with WOTC, it mostly worked.

 

[Tony Vargas]

They could see if they could resell material to the already satisfied base, or try to get ones that weren't satisfied. They bet on the latter, and unlike the 4e experience with WOTC, it mostly worked.

I'm sure not having to hit a 50-100mil sales goal helped.