Hmmm...while I think a great deal of the ancestries, backgrounds, and race stuff is good and a good deal of the classes are interesting, I'm still getting 4th Edition vibes from this for some reason. Maybe it's because it's just not flushed out enough yet?
Most people sleep about seven or eight hours a night. That leaves 16 or 17 hours awake each day. Or about 1,000 minutes.
Let’s think about those 1,000 minutes as 100 10-minute blocks. That’s what you wake up with every day.
Throughout the day, you spend 10 minutes of your life on each block, until you eventually run out of blocks and it’s time to go to sleep.
It’s always good to step back and think about how we’re using those 100 blocks we get each day. How many of them are put towards making your future better, and how many of them are just there to be enjoyed? How many of them are spent with other people, and how many are for time by yourself? How many are used to create something, and how many are used to consume something? How many of the blocks are focused on your body, how many on your mind, and how many on neither one in particular? Which are your favorite blocks of the day, and which are your least favorite?
Imagine these blocks laid out on a grid. What if you had to label each one with a purpose?
You’d have to think about everything you might spend your time doing in the context of its worth in blocks. Cooking dinner requires three blocks, while ordering in requires zero—is cooking dinner worth three blocks to you? Is 10 minutes of meditation a day important enough to dedicate a block to it? Reading 20 minutes a night allows you to read 15 additional books a year—is that worth two blocks? If your favorite recreation is playing video games, you’d have to consider the value you place on fun before deciding how many blocks it warrants. Getting a drink with a friend after work takes up about 10 blocks. How often do you want to use 10 blocks for that purpose, and on which friends? Which blocks should be treated as non-negotiable in their labeled purpose and which should be more flexible? Which blocks should be left blank, with no assigned purpose at all?
Now imagine a similar grid, but one where each block is labeled exactly how you spent it yesterday.
The question to ask is: How are the two grids different from each other, and why?
The question to ask is: How are the two grids different from each other, and why?
Good question. To me 4th edition D&D was far more hack and slash than 3.5 D&D or 1st Edition Pathfinder with a lot of the detail from 3.5 drummed down or outright excluded. Not sure if that's a fair comparison to this new Playtest for Pathfinder. Perhaps it's the fact that a great deal is different that's giving this vibe to me?
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like this forum needs a new rule: If you don't have anything to say other than "it feels like 4e" then don't say anything at all.
Like. You don't even have a criticism here. Just a vague notion that it reminds you of a previous edition that most people who frequent these forums did not enjoy.
That thread title though.
(For the record I see very very little that it has in common with 4th I guess I could start copy pasting my response to the last 5 threads that said this.) Isn't their a rule about edition warring?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That thread title though.
(For the record I see very very little that it has in common with 4th I guess I could start copy pasting my response to the last 5 threads that said this.) Isn't their a rule about edition warring?
i can see the level-gated stripes of 'powers' you get as you advance in a class invoking the spectre of 4e, as well as the apparent shift away from grand adventure into a more tactical boardgame focus (many utility spells are listed as uncommon now, skills are oddly limited in utility application, etc).
it was also my initial reaction to the new class layout as well, to be honest, and though after reading further it's been alleviated somewhat i can understand why someone freshly seeing the playtest may think so as well.
-----
I feel like this forum needs a new rule: If you don't have anything to say other than "it feels like 4e" then don't say anything at all.
Like. You don't even have a criticism here. Just a vague notion that it reminds you of a previous edition that most people who frequent these forums did not enjoy.
dismissing people out of hand despite many people having the same notion seems, well, dismissive (the same with some others' attitudes of "well if you don't like it, there's the door"). it should perhaps make one question as to why or how that many people all get the same impression, and what ways the system can be improved or clarified to show the differences.
"this feels bad" is in fact a proper criticism, if a bit unhelpful if they can't place/explain exactly why.
Just for the abridged version of my its no more 4 then 3 or 2. I think I think every time a new book comes out their is going to be some things like look familiar and some things that are new thats kind of a no duh thing to say I know. When I first saw 5th D&D I thought Huh this is rather similar to 1st edition in a lot of ways. etc. etc. but at this point I don't think we need any more of the huh this reminds me of X type threads.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
dismissing people out of hand despite many people having the same notion seems, well, dismissive (the same with some others' attitudes of "well if you don't like it, there's the door"). it should perhaps make one question as to why or how that many people all get the same impression, and what ways the system can be improved or clarified to show the differences.
"this feels bad" is in fact a proper criticism, if a bit unhelpful if they can't place/explain exactly why.
It is dismissive, it's also the correct response. I have no way of knowing what the OP has a problem with, for all I know he just got infected by the 4e meme and is regurgitating it.
The "criticism" only even works because we're all coming into this thread with the assumption that almost no one on the Paizo forums enjoyed 4e. If I didn't have that historical knowledge that Pathfinder's customer base is largely people disappointed by 4e and who went on to look for other options looking at OP's post wouldn't even tell me that he's unhappy with PF2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like this forum needs a new rule: If you don't have anything to say other than "it feels like 4e" then don't say anything at all.
Like. You don't even have a criticism here. Just a vague notion that it reminds you of a previous edition that most people who frequent these forums did not enjoy.
Dissatisfied customers won't buy the product. This rule you're describing is self-defeating.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
A large chunk of "I hate 4th ed and everything that reminds me of it" comes from the way the 3.5e->4e transition happened (axing licenses, pulling PDFs from stores), from the way WotC marketed the game ("ur previous editions are stoopid") and from WotC's deeply mistaken attempt to cozy up to MMO fans by introducing concepts like dusting magic items or assuming MMO-ish conventions for naming things "you see 3 Goblin Shadowslashers, 2 Gnoll Warstompers, 1 Orc Wingshadow and 1 Orc Deathspeaker". The latter began even earlier in 3.5, with the final Monster Manuals slowly going that way.
The game itself was a serviceable tactical wargame ruleset, which is pretty much the same as every D&D ruleset. Rules for hack and slash with some tiny bit of non-combat elements, just like it was since 1978.
But the way WotC presented it triggered a cohort of people who, well, are kind of hung up on traditions, One-True-Wayisms and consider the game a rather big part of their personal identity. Like with die-hard sports fans, any change to the game is a change to their heart. And they don't take those lightly.
And so, they'll be looking out for anything that remotely reminds them of 4e (eg. keywords, bounded accuracy or asymmetrical monster/NPC design) as signs of doom at the doorstep, facts be damned. It doesn't matter that such design choices aren't in any way exclusive to 4e, weren't the reasons it flopped or are frequently used in design of successful games these days. It's somebody turning the Beloved Game into a silly video game anime MMO again.
I'm still getting 4th Edition vibes from this for some reason.
If only. Having read the rules in full detail and played some, PF2 is just a cleaned up, modernized 3rd that borrows *some* of 4E without capturing the rich character options and the biggest virtues of exception based game design.
It's probably going to become a good stepping stone between Pathfinder and 4E.