Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 5764175" data-attributes="member: 85870">Before responding, understand that though I infinitely prefer Pathfinder to 4e, currently I'm much more invested in trying out other systems than I am in perpetuating Pathfinder as-is. So take what I'm about to say with a grain (or twenty grains) of salt. Just to get that out of the way. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Some say that getting players--especially new players--to try any edition of D&D is a first step to getting them to play in your group, regardless of game. I don't know if I believe that. As GMs, we're generally not fighting over the pool of "hardcore" players. I think all of us by now recognize that the "hardcore" will generally play anything as long as it's interesting. There are exceptions, of course. But lots and lots of RPG groups have to fill out its ranks with those who are more casual in their play. To me, it's a much easier sell to get a player to switch groups if it's a game they already know and enjoy--or miracle of miracles, you're bringing a fresh, new player to the ranks of the initiated. Now to a certain extent, is this all a moot point? Yeah, probably. People like what they like, and it's rare to convince someone otherwise. If I bring in a "casual" player into my group who was brought up in the 4e tradition of the game, he/she is either going to "grok" my group's style, or he/she isn't. And if they don't, it probably wasn't a good fit to begin with. I'm perfectly willing to tolerate those who prefer 4e over Pathfinder. They're absolutely welcome to play their preferred ruleset and playstyle. Doesn't mean I'm not going to attempt to persuade them to try something else if I think it's worthwhile. Or stand up for the types of games and playstyles I like to play. Or voice my opinion that the company that publishes 5e, and 6e, and 7e should at least consider my desires and imperatives as an RPG player, and that those imperatives have a valid place in the game they create. I just don't see that wanting to increase my opportunities to get the most enjoyment out of the game(s) I love is somehow based out of fear. Along those same lines, I also don't think the idea that "I want to play the gamestyle I like, or I'd rather not play" is a negative either. Our time as gamers is finite. I'm looooooooong past the point where I'd rather "tolerate" sub-par RPG-ing than not play at all. If I'm going to play in an RPG group, it's because I'm getting what I want out of it. And yes, I know, everyone says that "Ruleset doesn't matter, it's all about your group!" Frankly, in my experience, that's only partially true. People choose rulesets because they like the style of gameplay it naturally promotes. If I knew a group really, really liked 4e, and wanted to keep playing it for the foreseeable future, and they invited me to play, I'd be a lot more hesitant to join than if they were playing, well, really anything else, D&D or otherwise. Why? Because at its core, the base assumptions about the style and focus of gameplay in 4e are polar opposites of how I generally get the most enjoyment out of my RPG experiences. Mostly what I'm saying is, let's stop being disingenuous about what we  want. Let's just be blunt--we all have something invested in the success  of the games we like. Can there be two (or more) wildly successful  companies in this market space? Maybe. But let's also be honest--there's  definitely a risk involved, and the risk is that our game/company is  the one that ends up marginalized in the future. True. But ~50% of the market still looks at 3.x/Pathfinder as at least somewhat of a continuation of the "traditional" game they've been playing for 30+ years now. The problem those who like 4e have now is that it appears that WotC is seriously wondering whether their 50% (maybe less) of the remaining market is really worth investing time and money into it anymore. Ultimately, the real bottom line behind 5e and future editions is this: I think all of us still think/hope that there's a "better D&D" still out there that will better serve all of us, and re-unite the community. I know that's what I'm still hoping for.</blockquote>

Verification