Quote from: Rhedyn;1080375That's a funny way of saying "the only reason D&D 4e wasn't the dominant game".

A lot had to go wrong for 4e to fail, Paizo making Pathfinder was an essential element.

You're not entirely wrong, but the REASON paizo (and if it hadn't been them, it would have been someone else) made Pathfinder was because of huge missteps in the design and marketing of 4e.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1080425So you hope.  But evidence suggests otherwise.  But I don't disagree with your premise that PFRPG2 will not be as 'good' or as popular as the first edition.

(evidence not found)

Quote from: S'mon;1080454So their retail business is not an 'opportunistic parasite on a weakened hobby'?  I agree, but I'm sure Pundit was referring specifically to their Pathfinder RPG.

I was.

Quote from: Omega;1080618The whole of the OSR may end up remembered as that too. Parasites.

Except while undoubtedly the argument can be made that the OSR benefited from 4e's weakness, it wasn't originally set up just to be a competitor to 4e nor was that ever it's mission goal.

The OSR has a reason for being completely separate from 4e D&D. Pathfinder doesn't.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1081192I was.

I thought you meant the entire company.  My apologies then.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1081193Except while undoubtedly the argument can be made that the OSR benefited from 4e's weakness, it wasn't originally set up just to be a competitor to 4e nor was that ever it's mission goal.

I'd argue that the OSR benefited by 3e's IP mismanagement due to the OGL allowing 3rd parties to effectively reuse/steal chunks of their work...

Quote from: RPGPundit;1081193The OSR has a reason for being completely separate from 4e D&D. Pathfinder doesn't.

What IS that reason?  Honest question.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1081197What IS that reason?  Honest question.

OSR was separate from 4E because the games it retooled were all out of print at the time.  Those earlier unavailable games were still being played, so the WOTC switch from 3(.5)E to 4E had no direct effect on them.

If WOTC would have stayed with 3(.5)E then Paizo would have simply kept publishing adventure paths, with their own 'houserules' inserted in them.  Just like Rise of the Runelords, Curse of the Crimson Throne, etc. had already done.  They may have done a larger book with their houserules in it later, but they wouldn't have published their own complete system.  So 4E did have a direct effect on Pathfinder.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1081177I'm honestly confused here.

We get it, you're a Paizo fanboy.

Quote from: kythri;1081241We get it, you're a Paizo fanboy.

Me?  Ok.  Not sure how you go there, but...  OK.  I don't see the point of 'loving' an organization whose sole job is to take money, but sure.  OK.  You are entitled to your opinion.

I HATE 3.x in all it's forms except Mongoose's Conan, won't touch it ever.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1081283I HATE 3.x in all it's forms except Mongoose's Conan, won't touch it ever.

I can appreciate how 3.x advanced with the capabilities of nerds so that only tech savvy nerds could play/enjoy it. Both 4e and 5e were playable by non-cyborgs or "normies" and diluted our sacred hobby into a collection of regular people who enjoy it because it's fun.

3.x was able to maintain the stigma in a world where liking nerdy stuff became normal. It could only achieve that through overly complicated design entirely at odds with a class based system.

3.x purist are the funniest kind of RPGers to talk to. By all rights they should be perfectly happy playing GURPS, but instead they will only play class based games that are complicated enough to make the character concept they want. Heaven forbid you give them a point buy and they start playing their concept at session 1 rather than level 7.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1081288Both 4e and 5e were playable by non-cyborgs or "normies"

I don't really think that's true of 4e. I've had people play it for 6 years and still have no idea what they're doing. It was a great system for crunch-loving gearhead lesbians, though.

Quote from: Rhedyn;10812883.x purist are the funniest kind of RPGers to talk to. By all rights they should be perfectly happy playing GURPS, but instead they will only play class based games that are complicated enough to make the character concept they want. Heaven forbid you give them a point buy and they start playing their concept at session 1 rather than level 7.

I dont think that you can blame that on 3e purists.  Most DnD gamers that I have talked to about point buy just assume that it is only for min-maxing your character.

I am probably as close to a 3e purist that I know and I loved the DnD point buy system in 2e.  Never played GURPS though.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1081190You're not entirely wrong, but the REASON paizo (and if it hadn't been them, it would have been someone else) made Pathfinder was because of huge missteps in the design and marketing of 4e.

Looking back, who else was in position to?

Pazio benefited from one of the great blunders WOTC ever made: Allowing Pazio to keep the subscriber lists from dungeon and dragon magazines after they were pulled.

Those subscribers who carried their subscriptions over into the Adventure Path era, formed the backbone of the Pazio RPG audience.

Which had a big knock on effect when the PF RPG hit. It had a built in player base. Who then evangelized it online and in their local RPG scenes.
(Pazio publicly stated they hated the "edition wars" between 4e and PF, but they privately reaped the rewards...)

I'm not sure any other company was poised to take it to WOTC in at that level.

Or that anyone was even thinking about it.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1081288...
3.x purist are the funniest kind of RPGers to talk to. By all rights they should be perfectly happy playing GURPS, but instead they will only play class based games that are complicated enough to make the character concept they want. Heaven forbid you give them a point buy and they start playing their concept at session 1 rather than level 7.

This is indicative of the stranglehold the D&D brand/genre has on the RPG hobby as a whole.

I can't hate the hustle, D&D set the tone for the RPG hobby. But, yeah, I've noticed a weird 'D&D or nothing' mentality from more than a few.

Its kind of like car guys - some like all kinds of cars. Some are just Chevy or Ford fans. Period.

That effect is magnified in the RPG hobby due to there not even being two major "manufacturers" in the US to choose from.

It really is an interesting effect.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1081288I can appreciate how 3.x advanced with the capabilities of nerds so that only tech savvy nerds could play/enjoy it. Both 4e and 5e were playable by non-cyborgs or "normies" and diluted our sacred hobby into a collection of regular people who enjoy it because it's fun.

3.x was able to maintain the stigma in a world where liking nerdy stuff became normal. It could only achieve that through overly complicated design entirely at odds with a class based system.

3.x purist are the funniest kind of RPGers to talk to. By all rights they should be perfectly happy playing GURPS, but instead they will only play class based games that are complicated enough to make the character concept they want. Heaven forbid you give them a point buy and they start playing their concept at session 1 rather than level 7.

Oh, I know.  I played 3.x since it's inception, I bought 3e and 3.5 and had a campaign.  I've seen and experienced most of the issues it has.  Even Mongoose's game isn't that good, but it avoids a lot of the magical issues.  I am so done with any permutation of 3.x.  I hate the system mastery one needs to know to get the most out of the game.

4e was much more rigid and organized, but still not my bag.

Quote from: Jaeger;1081335Pazio benefited from one of the great blunders WOTC ever made: Allowing Pazio to keep the subscriber lists from dungeon and dragon magazines after they were pulled.

Those subscribers who carried their subscriptions over into the Adventure Path era, formed the backbone of the Pazio RPG audience.

Which had a big knock on effect when the PF RPG hit. It had a built in player base. Who then evangelized it online and in their local RPG scenes.
(Pazio publicly stated they hated the "edition wars" between 4e and PF, but they privately reaped the rewards...)

I'm not sure any other company was poised to take it to WOTC in at that level.

Not just the subscriber lists. Paizo had an excellent reputation with fans as a publisher of epic adventures that had top-notch production values. It may baffle a lot of hardcores and grognards, but for a lot of of gamers published adventures are the primary way of connecting with the game and with other hobbyists. The more popular the adventure, the broader the shared experience, the more people want to be part of that shared experience. As the foremost publishers of adventurers in the 3.5 era, Paizo probably had stronger market loyalty and than WotC itself.

But yes, I agree Paizo was uniquely placed to scoop up much of the D&D market. I honestly can't think of another publisher who could have published an alternative with anything close to Pathfinder's reach and appeal.

Quote from: Jaeger;1081335This is indicative of the stranglehold the D&D brand/genre has on the RPG hobby as a whole.

I can't hate the hustle, D&D set the tone for the RPG hobby. But, yeah, I've noticed a weird 'D&D or nothing' mentality from more than a few.

Nothing weird about it. Most RPGs are indistinguishable from one another to a new player. The reasons why someone might want to play WFRP instead of D&D seem like arcane minutiae to someone who isn't already well-versed in the hobby. And since it's difficult enough to find compatible people to play even D&D with, why would someone getting into the hobby choose to limit their options further by choosing a game 1/5th or 1/20th as popular as D&D?

Quote from: Haffrung;1081395Nothing weird about it. Most RPGs are indistinguishable from one another to a new player. The reasons why someone might want to play WFRP instead of D&D seem like arcane minutiae to someone who isn't already well-versed in the hobby. And since it's difficult enough to find compatible people to play even D&D with, why would someone getting into the hobby choose to limit their options further by choosing a game 1/5th or 1/20th as popular as D&D?

Few new players choose what system they play. It's chosen for them by whoever invited them into a group.