Quote from: Settembrini;414259It has also its own brand of paradox: Freedom of Build AND the Railroad.

I think this paradox does have similarities to the late-2e setup of a huge array of character micro types (with the layers of classes, plus customization within classes, plus kits, plus proficiencies and "class-like" systems bought with proficiencies -martial art schools, some types of magic in later kit books, some takes on psionics - plus races and subraces, plus regional 'templates...) with pages and pages of DM advice on linking adventures into plot arcs, etc.

Clearly there are a lot of differences between the two "cultures" but I think that paradox in particular is itself the odd similarity between the two - odd since I think most of the familiar Paizo faces think of themselves as fans of 1e at heart.

Quote from: Benoist;414263...the feel of Golarion which somehow reminds me of Marco Volo and such fantasies of AD&D2's era...

While the Pathfinder society, as a conspicuous example, has a metagame origin, in the game world it feels very much like this aspect of the 2e era to me.

My last post before bed:

mechanically, Pathfinder is an even bigger twink nightmare than 3e; it's all about build build build build.  

with that said

I have maaad respect for paizo as a company.  They loved Greyhawk and it shows in what they did with Dragon and Dungeon magazines, and I hope WotC collapses and Paizo somehow winds up with D&D.

There, I said it.

Quote from: David Johansen;414261You know?  While I'm no fan of 3e I'm really glad that in their attempt to modernise it they didn't go to a HERO style points system with advantages and disadvantages.  And I love GURPS and HERO and Rolemaster Standard System.

But there are some things D&D simply shouldn't be.  Feats and powers are on that list but that's another story.

3e does keep most of D&D's core concepts.

d20 to hit with class based chance / modifier
The hit dice vs damage roll
Fire and forget spells
Saving throws

Of these only the first remains in 4e.

For myself just about everything that gets layered on top of that is cruft that contradicts the core principles that D&D is based on.  Because D&D paints in broad archetypical strokes and treats combat in an extremely minimalist fashion.  I still hold that the weapon vs armor table makes more sense in context than variable weapon damage.

The experience points issue is really silly.  Balanced classes should have balanced level costs and unbalanced classes should be balanced with higher experience costs.  Since 3e tried to balance the classes out it makes sense that it used the same costs for all of them.

Thaco and BAB are no big deal from where I sit.  When you tell people to hit an AC 25 they subtract their BAB to figure out what they need to roll anyhow.  The tables would have been better if they'd integrated the weapon verses armor table.

/nitpick.
Of the four you listed 4e didn't really keep the first one -"d20 to hit with class based chance / modifier" - your wizard and your fighter in 4E have the same to-hit chance. Well OK, the fighter may get +1.
It does have the third one - fire and forget spells. Fighters get them too, of course.

First, Calithena and Philotomy are lucky people and I envy them. I supped on a can of sardines, and spent the evening reading mostly inane stuff on the Internet. It beat my day, but still. OTOH, I am accepting an award for young researchers today and having a proper dinner in the evening, so things may turn out right after all.

Second, here is how you use ThaC0:
1) Look at your ThaC0 (including modifiers).
2) Roll 1d20 and subtract it.
3) Announce the results. This is the AC you hit.
If that's complicated, you should abstain from complex tasks such as tying your shoelaces or deciding whether to have chianti or a diet coke. Attack matrices are technically simpler, but it takes more time cross-referencing rows and columns, plus they either occupy premium table space or require a DM screen.

Third,

Quote from: Settembrini;414259Pathfinder, while being rooted in the USA of Mr. Bush, did not answer the questions of the time in the same way as other RPGs.

Care to expound what the talented Mr. Bush has to do with it, or is it just a label for the general time period? I'd be miffed if someone called my d20 variant "rooted in the Hungary of Mr. Gyurcsany".

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;414269/nitpick.
Of the four you listed 4e didn't really keep the first one -"d20 to hit with class based chance / modifier" - your wizard and your fighter in 4E have the same to-hit chance. Well OK, the fighter may get +1.
It does have the third one - fire and forget spells. Fighters get them too, of course.

Jesus Christ.

I personally don't see build as being a big deal. It doesn't stack up to much. Anyone can stumble into a fighter with power attack, or a thief with two weapon fighting. I wouldn't call that build. Besides, players are pretty generous with advice on how to put it together for the newbs.

That isn't really even my point though.

When my players, all six of them, levels 4-5 came up against my home brewed Japanese tentacle rape, small farm eating, vinegar soaked floating head vampire with its damage reduction, regeneration, tube tongue, and domination gaze, how big of a difference do you think it makes if one player twinked out his character for an extra 5%? Not a whole hell of a lot.

Just because the fighter is averaging 14 points of damage per hit instead of 9, it isn't going to really change the encounter. It takes all of them and they know it.

Honestly though, I do want to go to a con and take a big dump on a designer's pathfinder game. Get all four players to make a chantry of neutral clerics with negative channeling, selective channeling, and 18 Charismas.

We would be a 1st level party spamming 4d6 damage in a 30 foot radius more times per day than you've got encounters.

Quote from: Melan;414280Care to expound what the talented Mr. Bush has to do with it, or is it just a label for the general time period? I'd be miffed if someone called my d20 variant "rooted in the Hungary of Mr. Gyurcsany".

First, your d20 variant is rooted in just youselves. But the culture surrounding your game? That, I cannot answer. If it is basically your gaming group, then it does not apply. Too individual.

Same for D&D 3.5/Pathfinder: The rules are expressions of individuals, basically Tweet & Cook. Neither of which is an IT person, btw.

The culture surrounding Paizo OTOH, is deeply rooted in the Bush decade. All the TV, all the US-Manga, they are linked. Example: CSI. CSI is a direct answer to 9/11. So, the exchange of inspiration from Novels to TV & Comic Books and video games, that is what is Bushian about the culture surrounding the late D&D.

4e, in turn, is the D&D of ECONOMIC and POLITICAL FEAR. Times have gotten so hard, that histrionic band loyality coupled with the eating up of propaganda to fight ANY uncertainty is the cornerstone of 4e-fandom.  It is the Fox News edition. Ron Edwards as Ayn Rand to the EnWorld Glenn Becks and O'Reilly Mearls, if you will.
The climate of FEAR also served as a catalyst to (some major elements but not all of) the OSR, I presume. Before jumping to false conclusions I highlight the word catalyst. The OSR is geniune, but the way it expresses itself is FEAR-fueled in many places these days.

Quote from: Settembrini;414299Example: CSI. CSI is a direct answer to 9/11.

CSI started before 9/11.  The first season was October 2000 -> May 2001.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI:_Crime_Scene_Investigation_%28season_1%29

Also George W. Bush wasn't declared winner of the 2000 presidential elections until December 2000.

Eras and mindsets do not end and start like a method call in a website. The SUCCESS of CSI is 9/11-fueled. In turn, CSI influenced court practice etc.

Something can only be a success if it is there at the moment of change/shock.

Example: Bush was elected because the majority had shifted already, thus Bush and CSI were "in the air". Both the story of Bush and the story of CSI were transformed by 9/11.

D&D culture reacted to the pop culture, and the pop culture definitely changed with 9/11 and Bush.

Shouldn't be too hard to swallow for the comic fans out there, you have got all those metal-ages, no? They might also not have such a clear cut end or start, and renaissances of philosophy X happen there too, no?

Interesting points. I will have to chew on them for a while.

While the influence  of an era interesting and perhaps even an accurate observation I think it is not of any significance. The personalities, the history of the product and their workplace environment loom much larger.

Much of Paizo is rooted in the fact they were focused on producing Dragon and Dungeon Magazine. I have the complete Kingmaker series and in some ways it reads like a highly focused monthly magazine. Not to say it good or bad it just the overall impression.

The designers of 4e took what they felt where the issues with 3.X, mixed it in with the company's experience with Magic the Gathering and came out with D&D 4e. Whether they focused on the right issues from 3.X is a matter of debate. Plus I think the exception based rule system is great at managing complexity I think what they choose to present with it was terrible. In

either case they gambled in a way that 3.X didn't on D&D's legacy rule system by nearly completely ripping it out. A move I think will prove to be viewed  as a mistake.  

Somewhere in the genesis of 4e the assumptions on how to present the product line got baked in and that will prove it's ultimate doom.  D&D Esstentials has been about changing how 4e is presented both in form factor and the package of classes, powers, and feat. The change being to make 4e feel more like older editions of D&D.

The new DM's kit focuses a lot on a mini campaign set in a corner of Nentil's Vale. If they continue this and shift away from encounters 24/7 then they may extend 4e' shelf life. Otherwise the focus on the game means that D&D 4e is going to have a short life among gaming groups. What give an RPG long term playability is the ability to roleplay and interact with the campaign. Encounters don't cut it in that regard as they are too bulky in format to allow enough pages to be devoted to roleplaying side.

Quote from: Settembrini;414302Eras and mindsets do not end and start like a method call in a website. The SUCCESS of CSI is 9/11-fueled. In turn, CSI influenced court practice etc.

There were other procedural police type television shows on for years before CSI and 9/11, such as Law and Order.  (Law and Order has been on the air since 1990).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Law_%26_Order_episodes

Quote from: Cranewings;414285When my players, all six of them, levels 4-5 came up against my home brewed Japanese tentacle rape, small farm eating, vinegar soaked floating head vampire with its damage reduction, regeneration, tube tongue, and domination gaze,

Wait - you mean a Pennaallgaan?