Recently, visited a Barnes & Noble bookstore curious to see what Pathfinder and Starfinder was all about.
Found Pathfinder and Starfinder book presentation to be unimpressive; the artwork and graphic design inside each book seem imitative and uninspiring.
D&D's competitors lack the style, grace, amazing artwork and attention-to-detail familiarity of the 'real thing'.
I find the artwork in Paizo's books far superior to anything in Wizard's products. This comes down to personal taste though, so you be you and I'll be me.
When it comes to art work, I think they both suck something fierce. We haven't seen good art in a D&D book since the 80's-90's if you ask me.
When it comes to presentation and usability however, Pathfinder 2nd edition is so far ahead of the competition, they aren't even in the same galaxy. They make a 600+ page rulebook so easily referencable I can find any rule in that book faster than you can find a rule using DnDBeyond search engine. Its that well organized.
My only complaint with Pathfinder is that they make such awesome adventures that I get analysis paralysis trying to pick. I just picked up Kingmaker and it's a bloody revelation. It makes the best D&D adventures look like 11 year olds wrote them with crayons.
You cannot beat full color plates from Elmore, Easley, Parkinson and Caldwell, but those days are long gone in this hobby, I'm afraid. the B&W art was exquisite. The thing is, getting that quality today is simply too expensive.
That said I agree about the ease of referencing in Pathfinder material. They don't have a D&D Beyond, but they open up EVER game mechanic from EVERY product they produce and put it all up on the Archives of Nethys for free for anybody, and searching that site blows D&D Beyond out of the water with the bonus of about ten times the available material! There is also an only character creator that uses all of those same rules at Pathbuilder, which also blows away D&D Beyond, IMO.
I also love that they produce pluggable modules for Foundry out of a lot of their adventures.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The age of OGL is over. The Time of the ORC has come!
The moment that WotC declares OGL 1.0a "de-authorized", "revoked" or any such nonsense is the moment I release as much content as possible under OGL 1.0a and say, "Sue me WotC". OGL1.0a cannot be revoked. If thousands of us do it, the countersuit will be a class action suit.
Releasing a D&D movie now is just another symptom of Hasbro wanting to milk D&D for every penny.
Because companies shouldn't want to make money is what your take is?
Nobody finds a Wizards "Making money" to be a problem; what most people find a non-starter is WOTC becoming conniving, avaricious, nakedly dishonest, used car salesmen in the pursuit of it... Which seems to be where we're headed given they seem to be wanting to turn D&D into one of those "Live service" video games that nickel and dime you to death.
Recently, visited a Barnes & Noble bookstore curious to see what Pathfinder and Starfinder was all about.
Found Pathfinder and Starfinder book presentation to be unimpressive; the artwork and graphic design inside each book seem imitative and uninspiring.
D&D's competitors lack the style, grace, amazing artwork and attention-to-detail familiarity of the 'real thing'.
I find the artwork in Paizo's books far superior to anything in Wizard's products. This comes down to personal taste though, so you be you and I'll be me.
When it comes to art work, I think they both suck something fierce. We haven't seen good art in a D&D book since the 80's-90's if you ask me.
When it comes to presentation and usability however, Pathfinder 2nd edition is so far ahead of the competition, they aren't even in the same galaxy. They make a 600+ page rulebook so easily referencable I can find any rule in that book faster than you can find a rule using DnDBeyond search engine. Its that well organized.
My only complaint with Pathfinder is that they make such awesome adventures that I get analysis paralysis trying to pick. I just picked up Kingmaker and it's a bloody revelation. It makes the best D&D adventures look like 11 year olds wrote them with crayons.
You cannot beat full color plates from Elmore, Easley, Parkinson and Caldwell, but those days are long gone in this hobby, I'm afraid. the B&W art was exquisite. The thing is, getting that quality today is simply too expensive.
That said I agree about the ease of referencing in Pathfinder material. They don't have a D&D Beyond, but they open up EVER game mechanic from EVERY product they produce and put it all up on the Archives of Nethys for free for anybody, and searching that site blows D&D Beyond out of the water with the bonus of about ten times the available material! There is also an only character creator that uses all of those same rules at Pathbuilder, which also blows away D&D Beyond, IMO.
I also love that they produce pluggable modules for Foundry out of a lot of their adventures.
Actually they do it's called Demiplane. I bought several books from them. I also own Foundry and several modules. After all this I will not support One D&D. Yeah the D&D 2e art is classic, but that might be because I am classic. DCC still has some excellent B&W art, very throw back. As I said above Reynolds is one of my favorite artists, probably even more than the classic 2e artists.
Releasing a D&D movie now is just another symptom of Hasbro wanting to milk D&D for every penny.
Because companies shouldn't want to make money is what your take is?
Nobody finds a Wizards "Making money" to be a problem; what most people find a non-starter is WOTC becoming conniving, avaricious, nakedly dishonest, used car salesmen in the pursuit of it... Which seems to be where we're headed given they seem to be wanting to turn D&D into one of those "Live service" video games that nickel and dime you to death.
Do you not use YouTube? Because the contracts they give their creators are MUCH worse than even 1.1 was. They take 45% of the revenue, they can de-monetize your videos anytime, while keeping them up and recommending them to users, and they don't even use people to review the videos, it's done by bots. If you really don't like what WOTC is doing, then you should walk away from YouTube as well. The 1.0a was a great deal, but always favored the 3pp.
Releasing a D&D movie now is just another symptom of Hasbro wanting to milk D&D for every penny.
Because companies shouldn't want to make money is what your take is?
Nobody finds a Wizards "Making money" to be a problem; what most people find a non-starter is WOTC becoming conniving, avaricious, nakedly dishonest, used car salesmen in the pursuit of it... Which seems to be where we're headed given they seem to be wanting to turn D&D into one of those "Live service" video games that nickel and dime you to death.
Do you not use YouTube? Because the contracts they give their creators are MUCH worse than even 1.1 was. They take 45% of the revenue, they can de-monetize your videos anytime, while keeping them up and recommending them to users, and they don't even use people to review the videos, it's done by bots. If you really don't like what WOTC is doing, then you should walk away from YouTube as well. The 1.0a was a great deal, but always favored the 3pp.
... I'm not sure what Google/Alphabet's infinitely terrible handling of Youtube has to do with WOTC...
Releasing a D&D movie now is just another symptom of Hasbro wanting to milk D&D for every penny.
Because companies shouldn't want to make money is what your take is?
Nobody finds a Wizards "Making money" to be a problem; what most people find a non-starter is WOTC becoming conniving, avaricious, nakedly dishonest, used car salesmen in the pursuit of it... Which seems to be where we're headed given they seem to be wanting to turn D&D into one of those "Live service" video games that nickel and dime you to death.
Do you not use YouTube? Because the contracts they give their creators are MUCH worse than even 1.1 was. They take 45% of the revenue, they can de-monetize your videos anytime, while keeping them up and recommending them to users, and they don't even use people to review the videos, it's done by bots. If you really don't like what WOTC is doing, then you should walk away from YouTube as well. The 1.0a was a great deal, but always favored the 3pp.
I am pretty sure there are many many worse contracts out there than the 1.1 license. Doesn't make the 1.1 any better. Not sure of the point being made here?
Do you not use YouTube? Because the contracts they give their creators are MUCH worse than even 1.1 was. They take 45% of the revenue, they can de-monetize your videos anytime, while keeping them up and recommending them to users, and they don't even use people to review the videos, it's done by bots. If you really don't like what WOTC is doing, then you should walk away from YouTube as well. The 1.0a was a great deal, but always favored the 3pp.
... I'm not sure what Google/Alphabet's infinitely terrible handling of Youtube has to do with WOTC...
Nothing. I asked if you are ideologically consistent. If you would walk away from WOTC over OGL changes, do you avoid YouTube and parent company Google? If not, then why is there that discrepancy?
Releasing a D&D movie now is just another symptom of Hasbro wanting to milk D&D for every penny.
Because companies shouldn't want to make money is what your take is?
Nobody finds a Wizards "Making money" to be a problem; what most people find a non-starter is WOTC becoming conniving, avaricious, nakedly dishonest, used car salesmen in the pursuit of it... Which seems to be where we're headed given they seem to be wanting to turn D&D into one of those "Live service" video games that nickel and dime you to death.
Do you not use YouTube? Because the contracts they give their creators are MUCH worse than even 1.1 was. They take 45% of the revenue, they can de-monetize your videos anytime, while keeping them up and recommending them to users, and they don't even use people to review the videos, it's done by bots. If you really don't like what WOTC is doing, then you should walk away from YouTube as well. The 1.0a was a great deal, but always favored the 3pp.
I am pretty sure there are many many worse contracts out there than the 1.1 license. Doesn't make the 1.1 any better. Not sure of the point being made here?
Agree. What a crap argument/discussion. "Hey look over there, their turd is even bigger than your turd, you're so lucky"
Releasing a D&D movie now is just another symptom of Hasbro wanting to milk D&D for every penny.
Because companies shouldn't want to make money is what your take is?
Nobody finds a Wizards "Making money" to be a problem; what most people find a non-starter is WOTC becoming conniving, avaricious, nakedly dishonest, used car salesmen in the pursuit of it... Which seems to be where we're headed given they seem to be wanting to turn D&D into one of those "Live service" video games that nickel and dime you to death.
Do you not use YouTube? Because the contracts they give their creators are MUCH worse than even 1.1 was. They take 45% of the revenue, they can de-monetize your videos anytime, while keeping them up and recommending them to users, and they don't even use people to review the videos, it's done by bots. If you really don't like what WOTC is doing, then you should walk away from YouTube as well. The 1.0a was a great deal, but always favored the 3pp.
When did Youtube start publishing TTRPGs?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The age of OGL is over. The Time of the ORC has come!
The moment that WotC declares OGL 1.0a "de-authorized", "revoked" or any such nonsense is the moment I release as much content as possible under OGL 1.0a and say, "Sue me WotC". OGL1.0a cannot be revoked. If thousands of us do it, the countersuit will be a class action suit.
Do you not use YouTube? Because the contracts they give their creators are MUCH worse than even 1.1 was. They take 45% of the revenue, they can de-monetize your videos anytime, while keeping them up and recommending them to users, and they don't even use people to review the videos, it's done by bots. If you really don't like what WOTC is doing, then you should walk away from YouTube as well. The 1.0a was a great deal, but always favored the 3pp.
... I'm not sure what Google/Alphabet's infinitely terrible handling of Youtube has to do with WOTC...
Nothing. I asked if you are ideologically consistent. If you would walk away from WOTC over OGL changes, do you avoid YouTube and parent company Google? If not, then why is there that discrepancy?
There are a couple of issues here.
The contract with YouTube is an actual contract signed by the parties and cannot be changed without mutual agreement. WotC is attempting to change the OGL that 5E was published under.
You make an impact where you can. We have a chance to alter the course of WotC's plans for the OGL and D&D. We have had an impact or they would not have addressed it at all.
It is a logical fallacy to claim consistency between incongruent situations.
You cannot beat full color plates from Elmore, Easley, Parkinson and Caldwell, but those days are long gone in this hobby, I'm afraid. the B&W art was exquisite. The thing is, getting that quality today is simply too expensive.
That said I agree about the ease of referencing in Pathfinder material. They don't have a D&D Beyond, but they open up EVER game mechanic from EVERY product they produce and put it all up on the Archives of Nethys for free for anybody, and searching that site blows D&D Beyond out of the water with the bonus of about ten times the available material! There is also an only character creator that uses all of those same rules at Pathbuilder, which also blows away D&D Beyond, IMO.
I also love that they produce pluggable modules for Foundry out of a lot of their adventures.
The age of OGL is over. The Time of the ORC has come!
The moment that WotC declares OGL 1.0a "de-authorized", "revoked" or any such nonsense is the moment I release as much content as possible under OGL 1.0a and say, "Sue me WotC". OGL1.0a cannot be revoked. If thousands of us do it, the countersuit will be a class action suit.
Nobody finds a Wizards "Making money" to be a problem; what most people find a non-starter is WOTC becoming conniving, avaricious, nakedly dishonest, used car salesmen in the pursuit of it... Which seems to be where we're headed given they seem to be wanting to turn D&D into one of those "Live service" video games that nickel and dime you to death.
Actually they do it's called Demiplane. I bought several books from them. I also own Foundry and several modules. After all this I will not support One D&D. Yeah the D&D 2e art is classic, but that might be because I am classic. DCC still has some excellent B&W art, very throw back. As I said above Reynolds is one of my favorite artists, probably even more than the classic 2e artists.
Do you not use YouTube? Because the contracts they give their creators are MUCH worse than even 1.1 was. They take 45% of the revenue, they can de-monetize your videos anytime, while keeping them up and recommending them to users, and they don't even use people to review the videos, it's done by bots. If you really don't like what WOTC is doing, then you should walk away from YouTube as well. The 1.0a was a great deal, but always favored the 3pp.
... I'm not sure what Google/Alphabet's infinitely terrible handling of Youtube has to do with WOTC...
I am pretty sure there are many many worse contracts out there than the 1.1 license. Doesn't make the 1.1 any better. Not sure of the point being made here?
Nothing. I asked if you are ideologically consistent. If you would walk away from WOTC over OGL changes, do you avoid YouTube and parent company Google? If not, then why is there that discrepancy?
Agree. What a crap argument/discussion. "Hey look over there, their turd is even bigger than your turd, you're so lucky"
When did Youtube start publishing TTRPGs?
The age of OGL is over. The Time of the ORC has come!
The moment that WotC declares OGL 1.0a "de-authorized", "revoked" or any such nonsense is the moment I release as much content as possible under OGL 1.0a and say, "Sue me WotC". OGL1.0a cannot be revoked. If thousands of us do it, the countersuit will be a class action suit.
There are a couple of issues here.
It is a logical fallacy to claim consistency between incongruent situations.
Nothing ever truly fades.