Grognards.txt NEXT: Goodnight, Sweet Wince

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > Grognards.txt NEXT: Goodnight, Sweet Wince

enrious: Jan 22, 2015

Apparently Dancy is gone (nominally for personal reasons but was just seen at a con hawking Kickstarter), the GoblinWorks offices are closed and the three employees that remain are going to be moved in to Paizo's offices. There's probably more but that's what I've been able to glean from some quick skimming.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 01:46

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 9, 2024 10:28

Slimnoid: Sep 6, 2012; Does that mean I don't get the job?

enrious posted:

Apparently Dancy is gone (nominally for personal reasons but was just seen at a con hawking Kickstarter), the GoblinWorks offices are closed and the three employees that remain are going to be moved in to Paizo's offices. There's probably more but that's what I've been able to glean from some quick skimming.

I wonder how much Dancy skimmed off the top before booking it.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 01:57

Darwinism: Jan 6, 2008

I'm more curious about the contortions and spin required to sell this one as another win for the Steve Jobs of MMO Marketing, if it's true. Where's this info coming from?

# ? Sep 3, 2015 02:11

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

I couldn't find anything more on the Dancey hilarity in a cursory Googling, but I did find this!

Pathfinder — The Unsung Tabletop Hero posted:

Roll for Initiative…

First and foremost, I am a gamer; and of those games that I play, none hold a closer spot to my heart than those good ol’ tabletop RPGs. Dungeons & Dragons took over my life at an early age. I cannot even begin to quantify the countless number of hours I have spent designing and running adventures for my friends. I began back in the days of Advanced Second Edition, and to say that the game has changed drastically since then is an understatement.

One Mr. Gary Gygax, a designer and lover of games, created the beloved franchise that had us delving into crypts, caves, and far away dimensions every weekend. It was not his first work, nor his last, but certainly his greatest achievement. Just for a brief primer on the history of the game, the company that he founded (TSR) eventually collapsed. The reasons are interesting, but far too complex for the scope of this article. Wizards of the Coast (WotC) ended up with the rights to the game, and things were never the same again. It’s been a long journey — a difficult path — but there is a light once more.

Third Edition

Wizards produced the third generation of the game, and although Gary did not approve of the direction, public appeal was at an all time high. To WotC’s credit, besides Gary, they did have the foresight to retain a lot of the original talent. Among those that stayed with the franchise was Monte Cook, who went on to write and co-write many of the titles released under the WotC label.

It seemed like a golden age for D&D was in full swing, but this was not to last forever. 3rd edition suffered from a cancer. Wizards’ marketing strategy was to thank for the success of the game, but their greed got the better of them. The various sourcebooks released continued to flow at an alarming pace. Before long, the library of source material contained dozens — scores — of books. The quality of material suffered greatly, and balance issues were par for the course.

Things with 3rd edition escalated out of control. Various errata were issued to help combat some of these glaring issues, but eventually even they could hardly patch the holes. Wizards decided it was time to take the game back to the drawing board.

Fourth Edition

The fourth edition of Dungeons & Dragons suffered many great criticisms, and with good reason. If this were a review of 4th edition, I could write an entire thesis on its many shortcomings, but suffice it to say that it would have made a very well-balanced video game. Sadly, it made a lackluster tabletop role-playing game. That, coupled with the money-grubbing strategy that Wizards took to its online platform subscriptions, gave rise to the darkest era of D&D.

The many flawed choices that Wizards made were not without consequence. One of those consequences was the loss of talent. Distraught at the corporate meddling in the game, Monte Cook — who had been with D&D since TSR — left the franchise behind. It was also after 4th edition that Gary Gygax died (personally, I think it was to blame). This was a sad day indeed, but there was a brilliant, silver-lining to this cloud.

The Emergence of Pathfinder

Designed by Jason Bulmahn, and overseen by Monte Cook every step of the way, Pathfinder was released under the Paizo label. Pathfinder soon began to round up all of the disenfranchised fans of D&D. Unable to compete with the name brand recognition of Dungeons & Dragons, Pathfinder remains a hidden city of gold. What makes it so great? Well, many fans of the game describe it as “What 4th edition should have been.” Another popular moniker for the game is “Dungeons & Dragons 3.75.” Whatever you want to call it, it is a balanced, expansive, quality-driven tabletop that has restored the heart to a game that lost its way to the corporate dark side.

Where the Path is Leading

Having played every incarnation of the game that exists, including first edition, the dreaded fourth, and even experimenting with 5th, I have to say that, without a doubt, Pathfinder is the creme de la creme. The reasons are simple, and speak for themselves:

1. Monte Cook kept the design true to it’s 3.5 roots.

2. Despite the slightly higher price tag, the Core Rulebook, coming in at over 500 pages, contains the value of both a Player’s Handbook and Dungeon Master’s Guide.

3. The game does not suffer from the high level imbalance that third edition did. Gameplay enjoys a much smoother, linear scaling model (Armor Class does not become irrelevant by 10th level).

4. Options, options, options. Each class enjoys expansive life, with numerous builds, or “archetypes.”

5. Source material is balanced, evenly paced, thoroughly tested, and worth every penny.

6. Digital copies of all materials are available for purchase at a discount. Perfect for today’s gamer, without the pigeonholing of Wizards’ 4th edition.

7. Multiple campaigns and adventure paths have been published and are available for purchase. A big emphasis has been placed on published adventures (for those of you without creativity). A stark difference from what Wizards has made available.

8. Rules are clear, concise, and avoid the vagueness of 5th edition.

9. A world of lore. Pathfinder, set in Golarion, delivers a unique world full of wonders to explore.

10. Familiar. Though unique, the learning curve for anyone experienced with Dungeons & Dragons is practically non-existant.

This is not your daddy’s tabletop. You might be playing in the basement, with a case of Mountain Dew by your side and Cheeto stains on your pants, but this is not 1970. The days of yore are long gone, replaced by the concrete and stainless steel forms of a soulless, corporate product. It’s time to come back from the dark side. Fortunately, somebody has cleared you a path.

—posted TYOOL 2015, August 21 :nallears:

# ? Sep 3, 2015 02:12

FMguru: Sep 10, 2003; peed on;
sexually

The news popped up in the SA thread about PFO in the MMO forum ( http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3697147 ). I haven't seen any confirming news about it - not on any of Paizo's forums or twitters or blogs, nor any of the MMO news sites, nor the PFO subreddit.

e: 9/2 nevar forget

# ? Sep 3, 2015 02:26

enrious: Jan 22, 2015

Found this, think I read another thread there earlier. http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/438970/paizo-restructuring-the-team-goblinworks-office-closes-pathfinder-online-mmorpg-com

# ? Sep 3, 2015 02:39

Lemniscate Blue: Apr 21, 2006; Here we go again.

Plague of Hats posted:

I couldn't find anything more on the Dancey hilarity in a cursory Googling, but I did find this!

—posted TYOOL 2015, August 21

Okay, seriously, was there a widespread dislike of the amount of official material released for 3.X and 4e, and I just never managed to come across any of it?

Or is it something people are now claiming they always disliked in reaction to the criticism of 5e's rather sparse release schedule?

(Also, Monte Cook never had anything to do with Pathfinder, if anyone was wondering.)

# ? Sep 3, 2015 02:43

jadarx: May 25, 2012

FMguru posted:

The news popped up in the SA thread about PFO in the MMO forum ( http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3697147 ). I haven't seen any confirming news about it - not on any of Paizo's forums or twitters or blogs, nor any of the MMO news sites, nor the PFO subreddit.

e: 9/2 nevar forget

https://goblinworks.com/blog/lisas-community-address/

# ? Sep 3, 2015 02:44

Falstaff: Apr 27, 2008; I have a kind of alacrity in sinking.

Darwinism posted:

I'm more curious about the contortions and spin required to sell this one as another win for the Steve Jobs of MMO Marketing, if it's true.

Not too hard at all, really. From the sounds of things, PFO is going to be on life support - they haven't actually completely given up on the game.

Its death is inevitable, but when that death comes Dancy will already have been long gone. Easy to spin that as "everything was fine until I had to leave (for personal reasons), then it all went to poo poo. Too bad, but they shouldn't have tried to finish it without me at the helm."

# ? Sep 3, 2015 03:14

Kurieg: Jul 19, 2012; RIP Lutri: 5/19/20-4/2/20

Lemniscate Blue posted:

Okay, seriously, was there a widespread dislike of the amount of official material released for 3.X and 4e, and I just never managed to come across any of it?

Or is it something people are now claiming they always disliked in reaction to the criticism of 5e's rather sparse release schedule?

(Also, Monte Cook never had anything to do with Pathfinder, if anyone was wondering.)

No, no there really wasn't. But there have probably been as many pathfinder books as there have been 4e books. If anything, if we use 3.5 as an example, pathfinder is in the late stages of it's life cycle before it has to reboot to 4e. They've been releasing a lot more experimental books, but they haven't jumped the "Make non-casters as strong as casters" shark yet.

jadarx posted:

https://goblinworks.com/blog/lisas-community-address/

How does Dancy still get work?

# ? Sep 3, 2015 03:23

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

Lemniscate Blue posted:

Okay, seriously, was there a widespread dislike of the amount of official material released for 3.X and 4e, and I just never managed to come across any of it?

Or is it something people are now claiming they always disliked in reaction to the criticism of 5e's rather sparse release schedule?

The supplement treadmill has been criticized ever since it became a thing, and DD3x was a top offender, but the most strident, latest whining is mostly defensive bandwagoneering.

quote:

(Also, Monte Cook never had anything to do with Pathfinder, if anyone was wondering.)

He was a consultant and wrote a foreword for the core book, but otherwise yeah.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 03:24

FMguru: Sep 10, 2003; peed on;
sexually

jadarx posted:

https://goblinworks.com/blog/lisas-community-address/

Whoomp, there it is.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 03:40

Night10194: Feb 13, 2012; We'll start,
like many good things,
with a bear.

Kurieg posted:

How does Dancy still get work?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcibiades

He's basically this guy, but for elfgames.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 03:46

Bieeanshee: Aug 21, 2000; Not keen on keening.; Grimey Drawer

Kurieg posted:

How does Dancy still get work?

A vast array of myopic contacts, apparently.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 03:47

CaptCommy: Aug 13, 2012; The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a goat.

jadarx posted:

https://goblinworks.com/blog/lisas-community-address/

I love the enormous guilt trip they run on their existing subscribers to try and keep afloat.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 03:55

Kurieg: Jul 19, 2012; RIP Lutri: 5/19/20-4/2/20

CaptCommy posted:

I love the enormous guilt trip they run on their existing subscribers to try and keep afloat.

quote:

Q: Any thoughts about lowering the monthly price?

A: Every time we have lowered the price on Pathfinder Online in the past nine months, we have kept the same number of folks playing the game but brought in less money. At a time when we are entirely reliant on the revenue from subscriptions to keep the game live on the server and employ our core team, decreasing the monthly price is not an option.

Q: Are you still recruiting new players? Marketing?

A: We are always looking for new players for the game. EE10.2 will have a vast revamp of the new player experience in an effort to help new players get into the game. We will still be offering the free 15-day trial accounts that we have in the past. But the main way we are going to reach new players is through you, the active Pathfinder Online player. We need you to reach out to the various communities you are active in and find like-minded players who would enjoy Pathfinder Online. If everyone brought just one more person into the game, we would be able to expand our headcount and the game would get made quicker.

Q: How can the community help?

A: The number one way the community can help is by continuing to pay your monthly subscriptions to fund the ongoing development of the game and keep the servers live. Also, reaching out to other gamers you think might enjoy Pathfinder Online is a great way for us to grow our player base. Beyond that, keep doing what you already do�answering questions from new players, offering to group up, running classes for Pathfinder University, and just making both the live gama and the forums a great place to game.

No one would ask these questions, given their previous statements. And given their previous statements no one should continue to give them money.

Also Dancy's "personal reasons" seem incredibly suspect. I'm sure someone found him skimming the cookie jar and they're trying to quietly oust him while saving face because everyone with half a brain said that he'd do this when they hired him.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 04:03

Halloween Jack: Sep 12, 2003; I WILL CUT OFF BOTH OF MY ARMS BEFORE I VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT IS MORE POPULAR THAN BERNIE!!!!!

Kurieg posted:

How does Dancy still get work?

If Ken Whitman gets work, anything is possible.

quote:

That's pretty much my concern in a nutshell, and taken in context it's what makes OBS's policies so disturbing and hypocritical. That said I doubt anyone from OBS is reading these posts, nor will humor challenges with a response. As a long time industry observer, and someone who made some lengthy posts here already, I imagine OBS will not back down simply because even when shown to be wrong and hypocritical there is fear that actually backpedaling when shown to be wrong will make them vulnerable. I always hope to be pleasantly surprised, but as a general rule within "fandom" which includes RPGs, video games, etc... I rarely see companies do the right thing when challenged, especially nowadays, and especially when it comes to standing up to out of control liberals. These kinds of attitudes are a big part of what "Gamersgate" was about and the fact that OBS pulled a CCG based off of that is a pretty strong declaration that the leadership is in favor of censorship in service of the liberal agenda.... which this is, because "Tournament Of Rapists" is being pulled with the full understanding of it's content and context, as well as doubtlessly the understanding that it is thematically similar to many things throughout the sphere of fantasy and science fiction, and especially common when it comes to horror.
Basically when the blurb stats out saying that they are moving away from a "censorship is wrong!" position to one where they feel they have a duty to be censors and have been shirking it, your going into the territory of pure evil as was pointed out. OBS's head has just explained he has a duty to be a censor, and while It involves pulling a Godwin consider we had a world war against the last group of liberals (a socialist workers movement) who possessed similar sentiments.
In a modern context, with digital products, refusing a published work distribution of this sort is similar to if you grabbed the product and burned it publically. Today "Tournament Of Rapists" is on the bonfire, what's going to be thrown on there tomorrow? Really from the description the only thing that stands out here is the name. People let this go and eventually it will be one of their favorites on the bonfire, but they will have let things go to the point where there will be no stopping it. Especially when you consider that the justification for burning this book once it was understood applies to literally hundreds of others including classics like "Masks Of Nylarthotep".

# ? Sep 3, 2015 04:13

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

Lemniscate Blue posted:

Okay, seriously, was there a widespread dislike of the amount of official material released for 3.X and 4e, and I just never managed to come across any of it?

Or is it something people are now claiming they always disliked in reaction to the criticism of 5e's rather sparse release schedule?

It's the latter. People are retroactively saying they prefer less splat because 5e doesn't have a lot of splat, and the designers are playing it off as "well that's what we've always intended to do"

Or rather, it's understandable why people might prefer less splat, but there wasn't a strong/active demand that there should be less of it until it became apparent that 5e wasn't going to have a lot (yet) and they needed to rationalize the state of affairs.

Lemniscate Blue posted:

(Also, Monte Cook never had anything to do with Pathfinder, if anyone was wondering.)

Monte Cook did have something to do with 3rd Edition though, and Pathfinder folks like to claim that there's a single unbroken chain of stuff leading from one to the other.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 04:19

Nessus: Dec 22, 2003; After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!

quote:

In a modern context, with digital products, refusing a published work distribution of this sort is similar to if you grabbed the product and burned it publically.

I just want to marvel at this in its splendid isolation from context.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 04:21

slap me and kiss me: Apr 1, 2008; You best protect ya neck

gradenko_2000 posted:

Monte Cook did have something to do with 3rd Edition though, and Pathfinder folks like to claim that there's a single unbroken chain of stuff leading from one to the other.

Ah yes, the Third Rome.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 04:25

Kai Tave: Jul 2, 2012; Fallen Rib

Nessus posted:

I just want to marvel at this in its splendid isolation from context.

Tournament of Rapists: thematically similar to many things throughout the sphere of fantasy and science fiction.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 04:27

Chill la Chill: Jul 2, 2007; Don't lose your gay

quote:

Monte Cook did have something to do with 3rd Edition though, and Pathfinder folks like to claim that there's a single unbroken chain of stuff leading from one to the other.

Lol. So it's like the succession of popes and the heretics claim their antipope is the real one? :allears:

# ? Sep 3, 2015 04:28

Nessus: Dec 22, 2003; After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!

Kai Tave posted:

Tournament of Rapists: thematically similar to many things throughout the sphere of fantasy and science fiction.

Wrestling also has tournaments and, unfortunately, rapists - so therefore, WWWRPG must be banned immediately!

# ? Sep 3, 2015 04:30

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

Chill la Chill posted:

Lol. So it's like the succession of popes and the heretics claim their antipope is the real one?

I'm really not kidding. From Alien Rope Burn's F&F review:

quote:

quote:
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game posted:
This imaginative tabletop game builds upon more than 10 years of system development and an open playtest involving more than 50,000 gamers to create a cutting-edge RPG experience that brings the all-time best-selling set of fantasy rules into the new millennium.

What you have to realize - in case you've just crawled out of a womb and haven't heard - is that Pathfinder is based directly on Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 and its tie-in system, d20. So that's what they're getting "more than 10 years" of development. Of course, they didn't develop it for ten years. Wizards of the Coast did.

But wait. Hang on. Hold up a second.

Dungeons and Dragons 3rd Edition was released in 2000. Pathfinder was released in 2009. So. They're counting development time before release, maybe? In 2003, it was revised as Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 . Now, one thing to understand is that Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 did develop many new ideas. None of which Pathfinder is legally allowed to use.

So yes, it was being developed, but very little of that development can ever be used in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game . Mostly, they're just revising 3.5, a game which was, if you count 1999-2003, roughly four years in development.

I realize this might sound a little nitpicky, but what I'm demonstrating from the outset is that Pathfinder is developing a mythology. Not a mythology of elves and dragons. It's about developing a mythology of being the true bastard heir to the Dungeons & Dragons empire, unjustly cast off of its throne. And well, crunching the numbers is a bit of primer before I mention...

... 50,000 playtesters ? Assuming groups of around five people apiece, you mean to tell me Pathfinder's crew of about two dozen writers and editors collated 10,000 playtest reports in any meaningful sense?

Nonsense, of course, to build the mythology, that this is a game rescued by and for the people. I have no doubt the designers probably even think that. It doesn't necessarily make it true, sadly.

quote:

The lead designer is Jason Bulmahn, a former architect that was hired to be the editor of Dragon back in 2004, though there's no indication of editing experience before that. He also worked on some products for Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 , like Elder Evils or Dungeonscape ... wait, stop.

Hold up.

"Lead designer" is misleading, isn't it? I mean, Pathfinder is a systemic successor to Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 , in that 90% of the rules are the same. So he's more of a lead revisionist, I guess? Plagarist, if you're going to be blunt about it. I mean, we know he can write and design, I'm not sure that's the best title here.

So who did design this game?

Well, the next name we see is Monte Cook, or "Design Consultant". He actually was involved in writing Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 , but he got his start in writing for the crispy crunchity games known as Champions and Rolemaster . He then worked for TSR doing books like A Paladin in Hell and Faction War . Leaving Wizards of the Coast after Dungeons & Dragons 3rd editoin he continued to write for Dungeons & Dragons prolifically through his "Malhavoc" imprint published by White Wolf.

In 2006 Monte said he was done with RPGs and would focus on other creative efforts, a state of affairs that would last a year before he was back to making his own World of Darkness or somesuch, and then quit RPGs again, which lasted like half a year, and then wrote some more RPG stuff, and then he got hired for Pathfinder , but only as a consultant, because he doesn't write RPGs anymore. Whew! He recently finished a kickstarter for his new sci-fi RPG of the sort he doesn't write anymore, Numenera , a game that "focuses on story and ideas over mechanics". Given his previous work on Rolemaster (mechanically complex), Champions (mechanically complex), and Dungeons & Dragons 3e (mechanically complex)... we'll see.

quote:

quote:
Monte Cook posted:
For almost three years, a team of us worked on developing a new rules set that built upon the foundation of the 25 years prior. Released in 2000, 3rd Edition started a new era. A few years later, a different set of designers made updates to the game in the form of 3.5.
And, of course, who carries on that tradition? Tell us, Monte.

quote:
Monte Cook posted:
Today, the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game carries on that same tradition as the next step in the progression. Now, that might seem inappropriate, controversial, or even a little blasphemous, but it’s still true. The Pathfinder RPG uses the foundations of the game’s long history to offer something new and fresh. It’s loyal to its roots, even if those roots are—in a fashion—borrowed.
Yep, Pathfinder is the true heir, unjustly dethroned, according to Pathfinder's creation myth. And - Monte - "Borrowed" is when you use something and give it back. This is taking. Grabbing. But being a grabber doesn't sound as nice. So he says "borrowed".

quote:
Monte Cook posted:
The game’s designer, Jason Bulmahn, did an amazing job creating innovative new mechanics for the game, but he started with the premise that he already had a pretty good game to build upon. He didn’t wipe the slate clean and start over. Jason had no desire to alienate the countless fans who had invested equally countless hours playing the game for the last 35 years.
It's like a series of political talking points. Continuation of 35 years. Comforting reinforcement of fandom. There is nothing that will challenge you or surprise you. Here, in Pathfinder , you are home. Game of the people.

quote:
Monte Cook posted:
One of the best things about the Pathfinder RPG is that it really necessitates no “conversion” of your existing books and magazines. That shelf you have full of great adventures and sourcebooks (many of them very likely from Paizo)? You can still use everything on it with the Pathfinder RPG.
This is not actually true .

quote:
Monte Cook posted:
In fact, that was what convinced me to come on board the Pathfinder RPG ship. I didn’t want to see all the great stuff that had been produced thus far swept under the rug.
Translation: "I, Monte Cook, can finally sell my backlog of d20 material once again, including the $120 Ptolus set."

quote:
Monte Cook posted:
The Pathfinder RPG offers cool new options for characters. Rogues have talents. Sorcerers have bloodline powers. It fixes a few areas that proved troublesome over the last few years. Spells that turn you into something else are restructured. Grappling is simplified and rebalanced. But it’s also still the game that you love, and have loved for so long, even if it was called by a different name.
See folks, it's still the real Dungeons & Dragons! And don't worry about the changes! It's not real change. Scary change. Threatening change. None of that here! Only gifts to the true fans who stay true... to trueness!

quote:
Monte Cook posted:
I trust the gang at Paizo to bear the game’s torch well. They respect the game’s past as much as its future. They understand its traditions.
Not like a certain other company by the coast that has destroyed Dungeons & Dragons ... not that you need to be a wizard to know what I'm talking about! hint, wink. Wink, hint. HINT, WINK.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 04:41

Chill la Chill: Jul 2, 2007; Don't lose your gay

That's amazing. Did you keep all that handy in case someone asks? I knew about the dumb marketing stunts during the edition wars but didn't realize it had grown into a cult mentality. (Or always was.) :allears:

# ? Sep 3, 2015 04:50

Nessus: Dec 22, 2003; After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!

I do not recall all the details but I remember hearing that Paizo basically waded in and stirred up the usual grognard messiness in order to encourage demand for a certain tome they were hustling.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 04:54

slap me and kiss me: Apr 1, 2008; You best protect ya neck

8 D&D's Top to Bottom, Personal Favorites

quote:

n/a. 4th edition D&D. Read it but didn't play it. It left me cold, even more than 3e had.

quote:

4E: I've played two campaigns of this and run one. That seems like it's pretty much played out the potential of the game. It fits into a terrible middle-ground that I'm not interested in, where combat is long and drawn out, but in a pseudo chess/magic strategic system just isn't interesting. If we're going to sink that much time into tactics and strategy, let's get serious about it, get out the terrain the mini's, and run it with something like OD&D/AD&D with full movement rules, facing, and so forth, which will still move much faster and be far, far more interesting tactically......or let's go TotM (with some light mini's and maps to keep perspective) and keep things rolling along to the interesting parts of the game.

quote:

D&D 4E I played this several times, and I couldn't get past the WoTC's Magic the Gathering with gridlines aspect of it. Its a solid, fun, balanced game. It's just not the game I want D&D to be. The massive amount of errata really turned me off. I have most of the books, which were basically obsoleted by DDI within a month of release since DDI was constantly updated with errata, and my books were just snapshots in time. Anyone want to buy a ton of 4E books? No? Didn't think so.

quote:

5) 4E - A fine game that does exactly what it sets out to do - but what it does is almost the exact opposite of why I play roleplaying games (perfect balance in encounters, same structure - no real mechanical differentiation between classes, other than powers and that was refluffable - I fell if they were going to do that, the should have gone all the way effects based like Hero or M&M. Not a lot of GM call - that was one of the things I really liked about 5th). So just not for me.

quote:

7) 4E. Sorry. I admit it's a well-made game, it's just... It's the polar opposite of 2E for me. 2E was a mess, but it did exactly what I wanted it to do. 4E is honed and polished to a fare-thee-well, it just doesn't really do what I want.

quote:

6: 4E : I tried this out as a player for a short campaign. I didn't like it. It felt really scripted and I felt like I was playing a boardgame with all the powers and stuff..

quote:

8. 4th. If I wanted to play WOW, I would have put it on my computer. Or as I wrote in my list: 1782. I will remember we're playing 4th edition and stop using my imagination.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 04:54

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

Chill la Chill posted:

That's amazing. Did you keep all that handy in case someone asks? I knew about the dumb marketing stunts during the edition wars but didn't realize it had grown into a cult mentality. (Or always was.)

There's an off-site archive of F&F reviews. Here's the whole thing

I read this maybe sometime last year, and yeah I do keep it in the back of my head because the idea that people came to the conclusion that 4th Edition was "bad" all by themselves is really quite preposterous.

Ryan Dancey came up with the OGL to allow poo poo-tons of d20 stuff to be published -> it caused a glut of haphazardly written 3rd Ed supplements -> WOTC decides to make 4th Edition -> they revise the 4th Ed OGL to be more restrictive and to include a clause that prohibits a publisher from continuing to make 3rd Ed material once they've published 4th Ed material -> Paizo panics because now they might not be able to make 3rd Ed supplements anymore

... so they create Pathfinder as a clone of 3rd Ed, so that any new material they decide to write will be for that game instead, and not 3rd Ed WINK WINK. But the only way this plan would work would be if they get people to jump over to Pathfinder instead of 4th Ed, so they waded right into the poo poo of the Edition Wars to stir it up so they could carve out a market share for themselves.

And thanks in no small part to Mike Mearls and 4th Ed's Essentials, that's precisely what they were able to do.

Now, I'm not saying 4th Ed is without flaws, or that there weren't legitimate concerns about how WOTC handled the edition transition (the idea that a previous edition has to "die" is in itself a problem with the hobby in general), but like a lot of 4th Ed grog, the legitimate concerns are almost never what people are banging on about. Paizo launched a deliberate campaign of misinformation (because hey capitalism right, it's just business) in order to position themselves as "the real D&D" and the myth has become reality.

quote:

If we're going to sink that much time into tactics and strategy, let's get serious about it, get out the terrain the mini's, and run it with something like OD&D/AD&D with full movement rules, facing, and so forth, which will still move much faster and be far, far more interesting tactically

Well, he's not wrong though - AD&D with the full combat rules would in fact be really interesting to play out tactically, certainly moreso for the Fighter compared to what he could do in 3.5

# ? Sep 3, 2015 05:09

slap me and kiss me: Apr 1, 2008; You best protect ya neck

gradenko_2000 posted:

Well, he's not wrong though - AD&D with the full combat rules would in fact be really interesting to play out tactically, certainly moreso for the Fighter compared to what he could do in 3.5

Once upon a time I owned the AD&D 2nd edition miniature rules, Battlesystem. It honestly wasn't all that hot, although my specific criticisms are lost to the sands of age and time.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 05:19

FRINGE: May 23, 2003; title stolen for lf posting

Pfox posted:

Once upon a time I owned the AD&D 2nd edition miniature rules, Battlesystem. It honestly wasn't all that hot, although my specific criticisms are lost to the sands of age and time.

Wasnt that explicitly for massive army vs army and siege type stuff? (I didnt have it.)

# ? Sep 3, 2015 05:25

moths: Aug 25, 2004; I would also still appreciate some danger.

Battlesystem was the 15mm mass-combat game, but there was a different miniatures-based system presented in Player's Option: Combat & Tactics (I think).

# ? Sep 3, 2015 05:32

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

Yeah Battlesystem was their attempt at a Mass Combat book for AD&D (and then Combat & Tactics had another set of Mass Combat rules again).

I was referring more to how the Combat & Tactics book had rules for blocking/parrying, called shots, disarming, grabbing, overbearing, tripping, sapping, shield-punching, shield-rushing, and so on. Anyone could do these things - they were either just attack rolls against a certain AC or an opposed roll, and since Warriors (that is, Fighters/Paladins/Rangers) all had high attack bonuses, they were always competent at these moves all the time and they could pull them off again and again, turn after turn if the player so chose.

To then go to 3rd Edition where bull rushing needs a feat, disarming needs a feat, unarmed attacking needs a feat, and so on, is disappointing to say the least

# ? Sep 3, 2015 05:45

Terrible Opinions: Oct 18, 2013

Lemniscate Blue posted:

Okay, seriously, was there a widespread dislike of the amount of official material released for 3.X and 4e, and I just never managed to come across any of it?

Or is it something people are now claiming they always disliked in reaction to the criticism of 5e's rather sparse release schedule?

(Also, Monte Cook never had anything to do with Pathfinder, if anyone was wondering.)

There is amongst grogs on their specific message boards. These people were the ones who whine on Pathfinder boards about bloat every time a new book comes out. Their preferred RPG would be one with the core book and nothing beyond it besides premade adventures. Despite this they persist in only playing extra crunchy games like Pathfinder. Many of them jumped ship to 5th edition and discourse was made better for it.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 05:56

Terrible Opinions: Oct 18, 2013

gradenko_2000 posted:

Now, I'm not saying 4th Ed is without flaws, or that there weren't legitimate concerns about how WOTC handled the edition transition (the idea that a previous edition has to "die" is in itself a problem with the hobby in general), but like a lot of 4th Ed grog, the legitimate concerns are almost never what people are banging on about. Paizo launched a deliberate campaign of misinformation (because hey capitalism right, it's just business) in order to position themselves as "the real D&D" and the myth has become reality.

A lot of it really came down to just having marketing period. The vast majority of WotC's marketing was spent talking down 3.5 instead of talking up 4th edition. There was a real since of "gently caress you guys for buying our 50 dollars books for the past X years". It also didn't help that outside of experimental subsystems the last two years of WotC published 3.5 had been really really bad in general, including a book that was literally 50% copy and pasted from the DMG. Paizo's biggest winner in marketing was "you can use your old books", making it very similar to Kings of War. Yeah 4th edition was a good product but most people who jumped ship to Pathfindeer didn't care because WotC's D&D department had GW level bad customer relations.

Also even taking that into account the vast majority of Pathfinder players didn't start playing until after Essentials killed 4th edition. When Essentials was the face of D&D Pathfinder might as well be the "true successor".

# ? Sep 3, 2015 06:06

Lagomorphic: Apr 21, 2008; AKA: Orthonormal

gradenko_2000 posted:

Now, I'm not saying 4th Ed is without flaws, or that there weren't legitimate concerns about how WOTC handled the edition transition (the idea that a previous edition has to "die" is in itself a problem with the hobby in general), but like a lot of 4th Ed grog, the legitimate concerns are almost never what people are banging on about. Paizo launched a deliberate campaign of misinformation (because hey capitalism right, it's just business) in order to position themselves as "the real D&D" and the myth has become reality.

To be fair to Paizo the foundation of their entire business was holding the license to Dragon and Dungeon magazines and they had just sunk a lot of development time into the setting for Pathfinder which was intended to be a a big expansion into adventure paths for D&D. Then right around the time they were putting out the first Pathfinder book Wizards announced 4th edition, the new restrictive GSL and took back the magazine license.

So their options were: become the premiere adventure publisher for a soon to be defunct edition; abandon all their development and sit around waiting to actually get details on the new edition and license; or use the OGL to start making core books money and permanently secure their independence from WotC.

I say all of this as a 4th edition fan with zero investment in Pathfinder beyond laughing at their terrible MMO.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 06:06

Kai Tave: Jul 2, 2012; Fallen Rib

Terrible Opinions posted:

There is amongst grogs on their specific message boards. These people were the ones who whine on Pathfinder boards about bloat every time a new book comes out. Their preferred RPG would be one with the core book and nothing beyond it besides premade adventures. Despite this they persist in only playing extra crunchy games like Pathfinder. Many of them jumped ship to 5th edition and discourse was made better for it.

I remember when 4E was new...like brand brand new, as in only the first three core books had come out...that the immediate criticism that it garnished was for having too little stuff or not the right kind of stuff. No gnomes! No Bards! Only four at-wills each? This is too little! It's too narrow, too shallow! What if I want to build an X that does Y, or relive the glory days of my gnomish bard?

And then of course when 4E started releasing supplements that addressed these criticisms (PHB2 by itself reintroduced gnomes, Bards, Half-Orcs, Barbarians, and Druids, along with a bunch of other classes and race inclusions many of which are considered a high-water mark of 4E design) things flipped from "there's too little" to "there's too much." There are absolutely too many feats (pretty much any amount these days is too much imo) and a third of all powers could stand to be junked, but the "supplement treadmill" gave 4E things like Brawler Fighters and Bravura Warlords, a really rad Monk, Inherent Bonus rules (finally), good rules for magical familiars, Avengers, Wardens, Vicious Mockery, really just a bunch of stuff, much of which is actually pretty decent. I would rather have a game that improves over successive supplemental releases than hold out hope that one day someone will design the perfect platonic game and call it a day.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 06:11

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

Well yeah, I don't really begrudge Paizo for doing what they had to do to maintain their business. Again, capitalism and all, and again, "the previous edition needs to die" is not a very consumer-friendly approach absent competing marketing shenanigans, it's just that it also really really damaged the level of discourse with regards to 4th Ed (insofar as what passes for a healthy level of discourse in this hobby)

VVVVV Okay, if I'm sounding harsh and/or hyperbolic, I'll cop to it

gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 06:22 on Sep 3, 2015

# ? Sep 3, 2015 06:13

Terrible Opinions: Oct 18, 2013

I really think you're giving way too much credit to terrible grogs. They would have grogged regardless of Pathfinder's existence, especially given that most of them left Pathfinder as soon as something else to scratch their angry hatred of story games came up. The really hardcore anti-4th edition guys turned on Pathfinder once it introduced new classes about a year into its life cycle.

Seriously just as an offhand example every single time a core book has been announce for Pathfinder people will launch into huge essays on their own forums about how they're quitting pathfinder to get away form the "bloat". This has been going on since 2010 like clockwork.

Terrible Opinions fucked around with this message at 06:20 on Sep 3, 2015

# ? Sep 3, 2015 06:18

FMguru: Sep 10, 2003; peed on;
sexually

Someone dredged this up in the D&D thread

quote:

Don't you understand?

In 4th edition THERE IS NO BLOOD WAR!

They took the entire cosmology and FLUSHED it.

I can't reconcile my 20+ year Forgotten Realms game with the crap they're doing. It's not possible. My game doesn't have a Feywild, or an Elemental Chaos.

So basically, Wizards is spitting in my face and throwing me out the door, regardless of how much money I spent on their hobby and would have continued to spend if the cosmology remained convertable.

Thanks, Hasbro!

# ? Sep 3, 2015 06:29

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 9, 2024 10:28

remusclaw: Dec 8, 2009

It always amazes me that these abject followers of the cult of the Strong DM have so much trouble putting limits on their game, or going against canon. Nope got's to play something else now, too many books.

# ? Sep 3, 2015 06:33

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > Grognards.txt NEXT: Goodnight, Sweet Wince

«‹›190 »