Pathfinder 1E Wizkids should take the Pathfinder 1.0 ruleset and publish their own RPG.

[Parmandur]

@Parmandur, it seems that in your rush to be a fanatical knight for 5e that you have fancied me to be in a "conundrum" where there is none. This is honestly a ridiculous argument, and @Jer highlights this point quite well with several pertinent examples.

It amazes me, Parmandur, how hardly you have decided to lean into this hyper-defensive behavior surrounding 5e that I described earlier:
Why are you so sensitive about people criticizing 5e in any form? Why do you feel the need to rush to the aid of the most popular, corporately-backed RPG in the industry?

Not defensive, amused.

 

[Aldarc]

Not defensive, amused.

I'm not sure how "amused" adequately explains or describes what comes across as an incessant need to defend 5e.

 

[Campbell]

Moldvay B/X and Apocalypse World are both roleplaying games, but they have massively different goals for play and expectations of what the GM and other players priorities will be. Just like poker and euchre are both card games with different goals, objectives, and strategies.

I do not think Fifth Edition is mediocre. Just not well suited for every task. It has a particular set of expectations for play.

 

[Parmandur]

Moldvay B/X and Apocalypse World are both roleplaying games, but they have massively different goals for play and expectations of what the GM and other players priorities will be. Just like poker and euchre are both card games with different goals, objectives, and strategies.

I do not think Fifth Edition is mediocre. Just not well suited for every task. It has a particular set of expectations for play.

The games can expect things of players and GM, but when the rubber meets the road the people make the difference, not the system.

 

[Imaro]

I'm not sure how "amused" adequately explains or describes what comes across as an incessant need to defend 5e.

On the flip side... it takes 2 to tango and you seem to have an incessant need to attack 5e, why is that? Do you feel PbtA is also stifling creativity... there are a ton of games using it's mechanics. How about FATE which also has a ton of different games that use it's mechanics?

 

[Parmandur]

On the flip side... it takes 2 to tango and you seem to have an incessant need to attack 5e, why is that? Do you feel PbtA is also stifling creativity... there are a ton of games using it's mechanics. How about FATE which also has a ton of different games that use it's mechanics?

In all fairness, @Aldarc did explain upthread that he is specifically frustrated by how 5E material is taking up a larger and larger percentage of the store shelves locally.

That seems more like a problem with the FLGS system than with any game being successful and broadly adapted, considering the options that are on the market broadly speaking.

 

[Campbell]

The games can expect things of players and GM, but when the rubber meets the road the people make the difference, not the system.

In my experience this is not an either or thing. Both matter substantially. The core of any game where we care about story (particularly of the sort that arises naturally through play instead of GM design) is a strong set of functioning creative relationships. If you do not have this it is pointless to proceed. The game then impacts the fiction in ways that we all need to respond to. Both are vital.

We can play two games with the same group about teenage superheroes : one using Masks, the other using Mutants and Masterminds. We will have different experiences because the play procedures, GMing procedures, and stuff the rules focus on and reward are completely different. Mutants and Masterminds cares very much about the details of superpowers, tactical play, and foiling the machinations of super villains. Masks focuses much more on the relationships that heroes have with each other and adults, how they see themselves, their lives behind the masks, team work, and transitioning to adulthood. Mutants and Masterminds will give you a teenage superhero game while Masks will give you a teenage superhero game.

 

[Imaro]

@Parmandur I was mainly addressing statements like the ones below that @Aldarc posted...

I do not hate 5e. I hate its monopolizing effect on the hobby. I hate that this is the only thing that some people want to play without consideration, knowledge, or even experience of other systems and yet treat 5e as if it were the One-True-Way to TTRPG.

I don't know. I'm seeing a similar effect in the market. You can, by the way, easily find 5e compatible books on DriveThruRPG for running 5e Modern, 5e Future, 5e Cyberpunk, or a 5e Supers. There is a 5e compatible book by Sandy Peterson for the Cthulhu Mythos.

Or people are calling for Paizo to abandon their Pathfinder lines to write for 5e. On the Carnival Row thread, some guy said that they would not look at it because it's not 5e. (Not because it was Cypher System, but because it wasn't 5e.) And while not Star Wars or Conan, Lord of the Rings has a 5e adaptation, and we learned this year that a 5e adaptation for Stargate is in the works. Star Wars is tied up in FFG's licensing, but do you not think that 5e a conversion would not be up for consideration otherwise?

So while we are not necessarily seeing one-for-one correspondences in the trend, I hope you can understand or be sympathetic to my worry about 5e's effect on the creative diversity in the market.

 

[Aldarc]

On the flip side... it takes 2 to tango

I don't think that the idiom "it takes two to tango" is being aptly used in this context.

and you seem to have an incessant need to attack 5e, why is that?

I do not have an issue with 5e as a ruleset nor do I believe myself to be attacking 5e. My issue has more to do with its effects on the market for non-5e based games and with a subset of its online community (for a variety of reasons).

The idea that "5e cannot do everything" is not an attack, nor should it be construed as one. And IMHO, that's part of the problem, the fact that people read what should otherwise be an uncontroversial statement - i.e., "5e cannot do everything" - as some form of attack on 5e. It's ludicrous. Fate cannot do everything. I'm not attacking Fate. PbtA cannot do everything. I am not attacking PbtA. I am making an admission on the limitations that these game systems have in simulating and engendering different RPG experiences.

Do you feel PbtA is also stifling creativity... there are a ton of games using it's mechanics. How about FATE which also has a ton of different games that use it's mechanics

Seems like a false equivalence given how neither of these game systems have anwhere close to the market hegemony that 5e enjoys.

@Parmandur I was mainly addressing statements like the ones below that @Aldarc posted...

You quote a post of mine that even leads with "I do not hate 5e"? And I am not sure how anyone could competently construe the second quote as an attack on 5e.

 

[Xenonnonex]

@Parmandur, it seems that in your rush to be a fanatical knight for 5e that you have fancied me to be in a "conundrum" where there is none. This is honestly a ridiculous argument, and @Jer highlights this point quite well with several pertinent examples.

It amazes me, Parmandur, how hardly you have decided to lean into this hyper-defensive behavior surrounding 5e that I described earlier:
Why are you so sensitive about people criticizing 5e in any form? Why do you feel the need to rush to the aid of the most popular, corporately-backed RPG in the industry?

He is entitled to his opinion and you are entitled to yours.