Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7402521" data-attributes="member: 12731">It's not a great idea. In fact, I predict PF2 will fail if they forget that the allure of D&amp;D is the texture - the incongruities, the exceptions, the oddities.Nobody want a generic game with abstract classes and fully streamlined rules.There are already retroclones and heartbreakers a plenty. What does PF2 bring to the table if not the D&amp;D experience? Remember, Paizo succeeded because PF did D&amp;D better than 4E.Let's hope they don't have hubris. Let's hope they don't delude themselves there's a &quot;Pathfinder market&quot; for a generic D&amp;D product that's Pathfinder in name only.Based on the play tests, I fear the worst. That they think they have a mandate to do whatever game they want, and that somehow us customers will like it just because it's called Pathfinder. Even if it turns out to be something else than a compatible D&amp;D clone.Instead they should have made what they did for Pathfinder. Identify a niche not served by WotC and exploiting that. They should have striped for a game that is recognizably 5e:ish, only more complex and deeper.TLDR the niche under-served by WotC is &quot;advanced&quot; D&amp;D. Thats what they should be creating. D&amp;D only crunchier. Not an unrecognizable rules engine that mostly resembles a random collection of heartbreaker rules.Thank you for reading.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 7402521, member: 12731"] It's not a great idea. In fact, I predict PF2 will fail if they forget that the allure of D&D is the texture - the incongruities, the exceptions, the oddities. Nobody want a generic game with abstract classes and fully streamlined rules. There are already retroclones and heartbreakers a plenty. What does PF2 bring to the table if not the D&D experience? Remember, Paizo succeeded because PF did D&D better than 4E. Let's hope they don't have hubris. Let's hope they don't delude themselves there's a "Pathfinder market" for a generic D&D product that's Pathfinder in name only. Based on the play tests, I fear the worst. That they think they have a mandate to do whatever game they want, and that somehow us customers will like it just because it's called Pathfinder. Even if it turns out to be something else than a compatible D&D clone. Instead they should have made what they did for Pathfinder. Identify a niche not served by WotC and exploiting that. They should have striped for a game that is recognizably 5e:ish, only more complex and deeper. TLDR the niche under-served by WotC is "advanced" D&D. Thats what they should be creating. D&D only crunchier. Not an unrecognizable rules engine that mostly resembles a random collection of heartbreaker rules. Thank you for reading. [/QUOTE]

Verification