Search results

Some weasel words I will be looking for when WotC finally issues a statement: "We hear you" "Our fans are PASSIONATE" "We never intended" "We want what's best for the community" "You can't please everyone" "Mistakes were made" "Greyhawk is a land of contrasts"

One thing that's occurred to me, as a possible key difference from 4e: While it's true 4e was highly divisive, that division was double-edged sword. Many people legitimately liked 4e as a game, it was a game that was confident and consistent in its own philosophy. It's also quite difficult to...

You just need a similar license that is Written by a respected and neutral party, NOT WotC Has "irrevocable" added

At this point, for me the only acceptable response from WotC is a true update to the OGL, with the only changes being Adding the word "irrevocable" Transferring ownership of the OGL to a neutral foundation made up of open-source advocates They can do whatever they want with OD&D, make GSL 2.0...

I feel like the big thing that would make it hard for WotC to claim copyright on these is they're such common words. Even if it's those 6 specifically, I think it's hard to make the argument no one could come up with those attributes without "plagiarizing." That said, I have somewhat mixed...

Well, for 20 years we thought the OGL was safe. Anyone designing TTRPGs right now should be doing their research on the best ways to protect themselves, but it's hard to say what the safest path is if WotC plans to activate Lawbarian Rage

I agree with your overall point that the more you differentiate yourself from D&D, the safer your probably are.

The six stats would probably not hold up as copyrighted in court, I think. We have 40+ years of those not just being used in TTRPGS, but numerous video games as well. It would cause absolute chaos and an insane amount of industry-wide damage to say WotC suddenly has a copyright on those stats...

IANAL, but given that a massive amount of the OGC at this point has been contributed by non-WotC parties, and was never part of D&D in the first place, is there not an argument to be made that "de-authorizing" the OGL is effectively stealing the content created by others, in the expectation that...

I mean, we have multiple editions of D&D games where the math breaks down at high levels. These are games created by professional designers, I assume using spreadsheets, graphs, numerous playtests, and such. Still broke down. So pretending we're only talking about "basic math skills" is pretty...

Personally I rarely find rolling extra dice boring. More importantly, it's easy to remember and do, which is very important for both new and old players. Fiddly bonuses and penalties have a tendency to be overlooked in the heat of battle.

The problem is 99% of dungeon crawls are not SEAL team time-critical missions, you can try to make it so but that's unlikely to be a permanently workable solution. If you look at how D&D is usually actually played, the best solution is probably to simply make most powers per-encounter. But we...

Part of the problem is that D&D wants to be "simulationist"(you do X, and Y always happens) without suffering the natural consequences of simulationism (players realize they are always more powerful with frequent rests, try to rest as much as rules allow). The easy fix is to just say players...

Oh I'm not talking about changing actual Pathfinder, just pointing out how you could make a 5e-like solely using the Pathfinder srd.

The biggest complications of the Pathfinder 2e system are 1) The multi-tiered proficiency system 2) The endless feat lists Both of those could be simplified pretty easily. Change proficiency from multiple tiers (plus level bonus) to a flatter bound-accuracy single bonus like 5e. Drop most of...

I believe they've said they don't really need it any more (and I can believe that, unlike PF 1e, which really felt like a modded version of 3.5, 2e is a vastly different game, with entirely new math), they used it because it's convenient. And they already suggested they might move off of the OGL...

If Paizo was concerned about that they never would have released PF 2e as OGL with an srd in the first place.

I don't think it needs to be, it just needs to have an open license and an SRD to build off of. I think it would be quite possible to make a "rules-lite" PF 2e variant game... heck, the 3-action economy in PF 2e is, in many ways, easier to grok than 5e's action economy. What makes PF 2e more...

Much as Paizo benefited greatly from the 4e controversy, I feel it would be very smart for Paizo to work with 3PPs on a new open gaming license which isn't controlled by anybody. Paizo could then essentially supplant WotC as the "safe harbor" for smaller 3PPs to orbit around.