D&D, Pathfinder, Core Rules, and the "F" word...

[Gradine]

Start here. Notice the cultural differences. Or you can use it to pick apart our argument.

https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Goblin

I have no horse in this race (pun very much intended), but after reading this article and the one linked to below I... still don't see that much of a difference? I mean, apart from a handful of wacky quirks and a very distinct visual style (which I love, don't get me wrong). They look fun, but I could easily see individual or whole groups of D&D goblins possessing some or even all of these quirks and still being recognizable as a D&D goblin.

I mean, there's more difference between traditional D&D goblins and Eberron goblins then there appears to be, at least from these two articles, between traditional D&D goblins and PF goblins.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Start here. Notice the cultural differences. Or you can use it to pick apart our argument.

https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Goblin

Are they riffing off of Labyrinth, and also The Hobbit, maybe? Lots of singing in both.

 

[tomBitonti]

I speak of the Flavor of the Core rules. Specifically, whether the Player's Manual (PHB or Core Rulebook) should be setting agnostic OR have a default setting in it.

So here's a thing: I thought that all of D&D3.5 and D&D4E and PathFinder were both agnostic and had a default setting. I'm not seeing a conflict.

After all, 3.5 supported Greyhawk and Faerun, and with just a little bending, Eberron.

What I thought was the issue was more the question of which default setting, and to what degree settings other than the default were supported. The big outcry (I thought) was stepping away from Greyhawk.

One place where I'm more in agreement is that the change from the Great Wheel to the new planar structure of 4E. That change, in particular, ruffled a lot of folks.

Thx!
TomB

 

[Shasarak]

This seems extremely far-fetched to me. I feel like people want to ascribe more complexity and depth to tabletop RPGs than they really merit.

A PF goblin and a D&D goblin aren't different. They're goblins. PF and D&D aren't significantly different. Chess is different, Monopoly is, but PF and D&D?

If people think that Goblins are different then lets play a game of spot the DnD Kobold then.

 

[Kaodi]

I have said in the other thread that I see APs as the strength of Paizo. Since their APs are all tied into their setting I do think that there is a definite case for making the rules more exclusive to the Golarion flavour. However - I would not want to see them go overboard with this approach. The Age of Generic Fantasy may be over, but as long as the word "homebrew" exists the Age of Adaptable Fantasy never will be.

 

[Jhaelen]

The Pathfinder goblins always remind me of the Gremlins from the 1984 movie by Joe Dante. Personally, I prefer the traditional D&D treatment.

 

[Remathilis]

I have said in the other thread that I see APs as the strength of Paizo. Since their APs are all tied into their setting I do think that there is a definite case for making the rules more exclusive to the Golarion flavour. However - I would not want to see them go overboard with this approach. The Age of Generic Fantasy may be over, but as long as the word "homebrew" exists the Age of Adaptable Fantasy never will be.

I have to agree. D&D has to remain at least slightly generic if its supposed support Faerun, Krynn, Ravenloft, Athas, and Eberron more or less equally. And while Pathfinder only needs to support Golarion, I think it would a great disservice to the setting to replace fighters, clerics, rogues, and wizards with gunslingers, oracles, swashbucklers, and summoners. I just think the core books shouldn't attempt to be "generic" in the vain hope of not-offending those who use the systems for homebrewing or alternate settings. I recall a lot of angst (for example) at dragonborn being in the 5e PHB because a lot of DMs felt they were world specific (that world being the Nentir Vale). Similar angst was levied at the announcement of goblins in the PF2e CRB (despite goblins being the mascot of Golarion) because they feel its too "world specific". To which I say; "Good on both counts." D&D and PF shouldn't limit their options based on what was done nearly 20 years ago. They shouldn't hide their lore, they should embrace it if for nothing else than to give a DM a suggestion or starting point for his own stuff.