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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Brother MacLaren" data-source="post: 7474063" data-attributes="member: 15999">My first knee-jerk reaction is that this was written by a programmer. Keywords, icons, and so on.  But then again I know Mark Seifter is a programmer. Old RPGs were written by humanities types (history and lit). Or social sciences; Tom Moldvay (one of my favorite creators) had a Master's Degree in Anthropology. This makes them read very differently. 3.X and PF1 are more code-ish than Gygax but less so than PF2. Even the distinction between 'fluff' and 'crunch' is IME a 3E-ism that recalls the way code is split into executable portions and comments. Pre-3E didn't have that separation (again, IME). All of the text had meaning for interpreting an unclear rule.Somebody, I think it was Monte Cook or Sean K. Reynolds, had a quote regretting spelling everything out so specifically in the rules and making it all so mechanical... a 'My God what have we done'... 3.X went in one direction, and PF2 has gone much further in that direction. Like 4E in that regard. I don't think that's good for the hobby in the long term. I think they should have placed more emphasis on GM judgment calls and allowed for table variation (and this is something I perceive 5E to have done a bit). It's a shame, the playtest document actually does speak to making sure everybody has fun, but the way the rules are presented seems to me to force the GM into the role of a code compiler.This all speaks to the presentation of the information, the experience of reading it, and the conceptualization of how the rules are to be used. It doesn't address the actual gameplay (haven't had the chance) or the content. In terms of the actual content, I like the ability score system favoring MAD over SAD. I like the bounded accuracy-ish aspects. I LOVE keeping paladins LG only, and the removal of Neutral options for several evil deities.  I like a lot of the fighter abilities.  And that's about it on first glance. A lot of things I'm apathetic about, and most of it I don't like compared to PF1.Well, I guess that makes me a "neophobe." Must be why I thought the Star Wars prequels weren't as good as the original - but they were newer! How could they not be better? Or why I thought MM8 wasn't as good as MM7. Or why I think Queen is better than Nickelback. Nickelback is newer! How can they not be better? Yeah, I just reflexively hate new things. I'll go hang my neophobe head in shame now.</blockquote>

Verification