Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7406399" data-attributes="member: 996">That's not weird at all.&nbsp; PF1 was an outright clone of D&amp;D 3.5, it was D&amp;D in all but name.&nbsp; It's funny because for decades, the conventional wisdom was that D&amp;D was the big fish in the small TTRPG pond because of it's hallowed 'First RPG' status in the hobby, and because it was the only TTRPG with mainstream name recognition, that the D&amp;D name, alone, allowed it to consistently beat out the many 'fantasy heartbreakers' that were essentially like D&amp;D, but better in some ways (and no worse in others, generally), not to mention the many games that were far better as games, but quite different, all in spite of D&amp;D being a backwards dysfunctional imbalanced system far behind the times.That conventional wisdom was wrong in one small but significant detail:&nbsp; &quot;...in spite of...&quot;What 4e (D&amp;D name, balanced mechanics) &amp; PF1 (imbalanced D&amp;D mechanics cloned without the name) performing so closely in the ICv2-measured segment of the market (some quarters D&amp;D in the lead, some PF, until D&amp;D went on hiatus) indicated was that D&amp;D's popularity didn't just rest on the D&amp;D name, but on the system imbalances that had come to be not merely tolerated, but demanded, by it's established fan-base.&nbsp; 5e has clinched that:&nbsp; having returned to a more traditional iteration of the system that restores the classes to their old pecking order and returns to built-in rewards for 'skilled play' (though not quite so much for system mastery, as 3.5 had), and, of course, still enjoying the benefits of the D&amp;D name, it is once more the unquestioned leader in the hobby.&nbsp; Hmmm.... having said all that, two things occur to me:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">&nbsp; I'm a bitter, deeply cynical, old grognard who should probably just STFU. (I expect lots of XP and selectively-quoted agreement with that one!)</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">&nbsp; Paizo does have a possible path to keeping PF going:&nbsp; rewards for system mastery.&nbsp; 5e has the D&amp;D name and is back to the traditional mechanical feel of D&amp;D.&nbsp; But, 5e's slow pace of release and reigned-in 'player entitlement'/emphasis on 'DM Empowerment' make the chargen/level-up optimization meta-game much less engaging and rewarding than it's always been in 3.x/PF.&nbsp; I mean, haven't we all built characters to an optimization target or concept for 3.x or PF that we never had a chance, possibly never even intended, to play, because it's just an entertaining exercise in its own right?</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">&nbsp; Edit: I've forgotten how to use list tags... 
</li>
</ul> ...that's better. </blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7406399, member: 996"] That's not weird at all. PF1 was an outright clone of D&D 3.5, it was D&D in all but name. It's funny because for decades, the conventional wisdom was that D&D was the big fish in the small TTRPG pond because of it's hallowed 'First RPG' status in the hobby, and because it was the only TTRPG with mainstream name recognition, that the D&D name, alone, allowed it to consistently beat out the many 'fantasy heartbreakers' that were essentially like D&D, but better in some ways (and no worse in others, generally), not to mention the many games that were far better as games, but quite different, all[i][b] in spite of[/b] D&D being a backwards dysfunctional imbalanced system far behind the times.[/i] That conventional wisdom was wrong in one small but significant detail: "...in spite of..." What 4e (D&D name, balanced mechanics) & PF1 (imbalanced D&D mechanics cloned without the name) performing so closely in the ICv2-measured segment of the market (some quarters D&D in the lead, some PF, until D&D went on hiatus) indicated was that D&D's popularity didn't just rest on the D&D name, but on the system imbalances that had come to be not merely tolerated, but demanded, by it's established fan-base. 5e has clinched that: having returned to a more traditional iteration of the system that restores the classes to their old pecking order and returns to built-in rewards for 'skilled play' (though not quite so much for system mastery, as 3.5 had), and, of course, still enjoying the benefits of the D&D name, it is once more the unquestioned leader in the hobby. Hmmm.... having said all that, two things occur to me: [list] [*] I'm a bitter, deeply cynical, old grognard who should probably just STFU. (I expect lots of XP and selectively-quoted agreement with that one!) [*] Paizo does have a possible path to keeping PF going: rewards for system mastery. 5e has the D&D name and is back to the traditional mechanical feel of D&D. But, 5e's slow pace of release and reigned-in 'player entitlement'/emphasis on 'DM Empowerment' make the chargen/level-up optimization meta-game much less engaging and rewarding than it's always been in 3.x/PF. I mean, haven't we all built characters to an optimization target or concept for 3.x or PF that we never had a chance, possibly never even intended, to play, because it's just an entertaining exercise in its own right? [*] [i]Edit: I've forgotten how to use list tags... [/i][/list][i] ...that's better. [/i] [/QUOTE]

Verification