Adjule wrote:Spook205 said wrote:As I stated, people have this deluded and wrongheaded belief that positive change only occurs in the 'progressive' or ever changing direction. Sometimes you have to say 'we changed things, it didn't work out, let's go back.'
Too bad that will never happen. Like you said, people seem to have it in their head that the only good things are the new and different, and going back to something means you are doing it wrong. Which is funny, since Pathfinder wasn't the "new and different" edition around 2008-2009 and was the "old and bad" with a slightly new paintjob (like 1 shade darker red painted over the slightly lighter red).
But going back to something older and simpler? How dare you!
I'm not sure that's a general rule at all. Resistance to any change is pretty common, certainly. Nostalgia for the good old days is also plenty common.
Reaction to 5E seems to be much more positive than to 4E, which seems to point towards people being more willing to move back towards an older style system than forward to something completely different. OTOH, it could just be a different attitude today than then. Or 5E could just be a "better" game than 4E.
Well, I guess, considering that a lot of feedback from the old school guys (me included) seems to be saying it's like 3e if 3e had been based on 2e, rather than a reworking of the system, the nostalgia angle is confirmed to my satisfaction.
I think the attitude might just be 3x burnout after fourteen years. I think that's another reason 3x took off like it did. Even with Skills and Powers, 2e was a continuation of the same basic game play from 1979 (the first year AD&D was complete) until 3.0. People were looking for something different, and 3x seemed shiny and bright. The new car smell wore off, and, even with the Pathfinder rebuild, the chassis is still long in the tooth. 5e is reminiscent of something old while still being fresh and different enough to tickle the need for new and shiny.
I won't comment on the relative worth of 4e compared to 5e. I didn't play enough 4e to really get into the nitty gritty of the system. But, I did like 5e better at first glance. I like my sacred cows, what can I say. And, I think that might be a difference as well. Enough people made it clear that those sacred cows were what made the game "D&D" to them that it split the base, with 4e being the smaller part of the split. The whole 4e thing really ticked a lot of people off, mostly for reasons that really had nothing to do with the game itself. They avoided that kind of thing this time around.
WotC, by restoring them, positioned 5e well to take advantage of some 3.x fatigue, Pathfinder tying itself to Golarion and PFS enough to take a little of the old school "D&D" feel away, and older players who want to play, and make their own stuff, but don't have the time commitment (due to families, careers, etc) to give PF/3x a proper prepping.