Pathfinder 2E Pathfinder 2e

[Tony Vargas]

Not to pick on you, specifically, but...

But D&D isn't "very popular" properly speaking in that sense. Similar to how Breaking Bad is critically successful and watched by many people, there is a larger segment of society who doesn't watch it but tunes in every week to NCIS.

...sounds like we're really trying to have our appeal to popularity both ways. D&D is the bestest RPG because it's the most popular, and it's better than all the other games that are so much more popular than RPGs, because it's less popular than them, therefor Elite!

I mean, if we want to believe that more popular = better, then D&D isn't as good as WoW or Monopoly or cocaine or a LOT of other things.

If we want to believe that being 'l33t with a cult-like following = better, then just about every other RPG is better than D&D.

I mean, in the context of this thread, D&D could be NCIS or Baywatch and PF2 could be Breaking Bad. All depends where you want to draw the arbitrary line for the analogy.

Can't we just drop the whole popularity schema? Maybe judge games by their content? Maybe even just be comfortable in our own preferences without needing to justify them?

 

[Parmandur]

Not to pick on you, specifically, but......sounds like we're really trying to have our appeal to popularity both ways. D&D is the bestest RPG because it's the most popular, and it's better than all the other games that are so much more popular than RPGs, because it's less popular than them, therefor Elite!

I mean, if we want to believe that more popular = better, then D&D isn't as good as WoW or Monopoly or cocaine or a LOT of other things.

If we want to believe that being 'l33t with a cult-like following = better, then just about every other RPG is better than D&D.

I mean, in the context of this thread, D&D could be NCIS or Baywatch and PF2 could be Breaking Bad. All depends where you want to draw the arbitrary line for the analogy.

Can't we just drop the whole popularity schema? Maybe judge games by their content? Maybe even just be comfortable in our own preferences without needing to justify them?

Great Caesar's Ghost, man, are you questioning the entire nature of the Internet???

Though, seriously, popularity does always coincide with a quality of one sort or another: sex sells because of the quality of being sexy, low-brow humor sells because of the quality of being funny. There is a correspondence, the mistake is in thinking "quality" means a monodimensional measure of some scale of "goodness" (when quality cannot even be measured, because it is not quantity).

And yes, 5E is in a very sweet spot, where it is both popular and edgy. I'd love it if it got even more popular and became as mainstream as Magic: the Gathering, but give it time.

At this point, I'm trying to not engage OF2 threads if I can avoid it, as my interest in the game has been satiated, but philosophical questions of aesthetics are like a flame to my moth-like brain...

 

[Tony Vargas]

Great Caesar's Ghost, man, are you questioning the entire nature of the Internet???

The internet is just the railroads of the 21st century. Future generations will only notice it when it gets in their way.

Though, seriously, popularity does always coincide with a quality of one sort or another...the mistake is in thinking "quality" means a monodimensional measure of some scale of "goodness

I avoided even using the word 'quality.' And, no, there's no such correlation. Pick a quality that a popular _ has, that you'd like to attribute its success to, and there'll be half a dozen other ______s with that same quality in spades, languishing.

Popularity coincides with the quality of being popular.

And yes, 5E is in a very sweet spot, where it is both popular and edgy.

Edgy?

 

[Parmandur]

The internet is just the railroads of the 21st century. Future generations will only notice it when it gets in their way.

I avoided even using the word 'quality.' And, no, there's no such correlation. Pick a quality that a popular _ has, that you'd like to attribute its success to, and there'll be half a dozen other ______s with that same quality in spades, languishing.

Popularity coincides with the quality of being popular.

Edgy?

For the average person, yup.

 

[Parmandur]

@Tony Vargas watched any 4 year olds look through the Monster Manual in wonder lately...? I have.

 

[Campbell]

I think the at the table play complexity of most martial characters is fairly comparable to what we see in Fifth Edition. It just resides in different places.

Pathfinder Second Edition characters have more options for what they can do in a turn, but those options are fairly static. The only resource they manage is the action economy and focus points (champions and some monks). They also have few passive effects.

There is a significant difference in build complexity. You pretty much choose every ability you have access to, but the actual complexity at the table is fairly comparable.

Caveat: There are no simple options like the Champion Fighter for players who just want to attack.

 

[Eric V]

For the average person, yup.

I am not sure 4 year olds looking through the MM with wonder is the bar for the definition of "edgy."

5e is many things, but "edgy" isn't one of them, IMO.

 

[Parmandur]

I am not sure 4 year olds looking through the MM with wonder is the bar for the definition of "edgy."

5e is many things, but "edgy" isn't one of them, IMO.

Again, for most people, edgy is the right term: check out social media reactions to Avernus, for another data point.

 

[Eric V]

Again, for most people, edgy is the right term: check out social media reactions to Avernus, for another data point.

"Most?"

 

[Parmandur]

"Most?"

Yes, the average Joe or Mary on the street is going to look at 5E and think two things: gee wilickers, that's a lot of math, and wow, that art is pretty edgy.

I'll stand by that: it's what most if the already pretty nerdy people in my ambit think, and it is the aesthetic WotC is clearly courting.