Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TheAuldGrump" data-source="post: 5676918" data-attributes="member: 6957">Do your own digging for numbers.You are coming across as shrill and defensive, deriding instead of productive. Tone it down. Try producing your own numbers rather than demanding that others show theirs.As an example with Amazon... isn't it funny that all of Pathfinder's hardcover books are on the list, and how many of WotC's aren't? Yes, Pathfinder has only a few of the top slots - but they run out of books before Amazon runs out of slots.... Hard to cover the 25 top spots when you only have eight books.... 4e has the books, but does not cover the slots.You may deride the numbers people give, but you offer nothing in their place. You hear rough numbers, then answer them with anecdote, you hear anecdotes and demand numbers, but do not ever offer your own. Your argument should be taken seriously... why? Support your claims, counter those of others with supported argument. Do not answer debate with polemic. You will feel better.Laughing that D&D is trivial in the eyes of Hasbro... how is that good for D&D? Hasbro has killed properties that were more profitable, GI Joe was gone for a decade before being brought back, less than half the original scale. Saying that D&D doesn't matter to Hasbro is not something that should make you feel safe....Encounters - Not everyone loves the format of Encounters - some in fact loathe it. It removes what I consider the backbone of the game. That said - I do applaud the fact that it exists at all, it is not what I consider fun, but it is getting noticed, and that is good.The local example was bad - but I blame the people involved, not the idea behind Encounters. I just don't like Encounters, which is not the same as saying that it is bad. I would have more fun playing Master of Orion II. Or Clue, for that matter. But probably not Hi Ho Cherry-O.You look at Encounters and see that cool **** is happening, and sure enough, I look at Encounters and I see a pile of, well, you get the picture. I like campaigns and adventures, I do not like Encounter McNuggets.Given that Pathfinder does focus on the campaign, trying to emulate that model would be foolish. It looks at the long game while WotC is trying to catch the attention of the Wii generation. Neither is wrong. Trying to demand that either should try to emulate the other is silly.You do like Encounters, and that is fine. But do not expect everyone who watches or plays Encounters to agree with either one of us - the ones who agree with you will come back next week while the ones who agree with me will wander off, muttering about finding a 'real game'. And, again, neither group will be wrong. And some folks will play whatever is running, and look at the folks who are arguing, shake their heads, and go back to rolling dice, whether they are battling through a forsaken temple or are sending a horde of Orks against a hill of entrenched Space Marines.There is room for both models - those who play Pathfinder do not need or want Paizo to imitate WotC. WotC trying to recover the gamers that they have lost when they unveiled 4e would be equally unproductive as Paizo producing material under a license that can be revoked at the other party's leisure. There is a reason that 3PP stay away from the GSL in droves....4e has its own fans - I may think that playing 4e is only slightly less fun than nailing my other foot to the floor, but I am not the audience for the game. There are folks who like it, and there are folks who don't.I prefer using the same mechanics for the design of monsters and NPCs as those used for PCs. I do not mind taking the extra time. I have more fun writing an adventure for Pathfinder than I did playing 4e.As for Pathfinder doing 4e material - 4e may well be easier to design for, but the pacing and styles of the two games is very different - it will not just be a matter of dropping in like 4e critters and calling it good - a battle that might take fifteen minutes in Pathfinder may take over an hour in 4e.Skills, encounters, traps, all are handled differently - it would not be a matter of translation but rather one of interpretation.Time spent doing so could be used producing material under their own license, one that cannot be yanked by WotC because the line manager sneezed.It is easier to let DMs reinterpret Pathfinder adventures to fit their own styles than to have Paizo writers wasting time doing so. In the end the DMs will be happier with their own conversions, while I do not think many WotC adventures are being translated to Pathfinder, at all.The last and only conversion I did of a WotC product was Expedition to Castle Ravenloft, when I converted it to Spycraft and set it during WWII.I am pretty much done arguing with you - there are better people to disagree with, who are more fun to argue with. I do not agree with them, they do not agree with me, and both of us are happy with it, so why make it personal?The Auld Grump</blockquote>

Verification