• bleistift2@feddit.deEnglish
    803·
    9 months ago

    „There are ways to make it simpler” completely misses the point of something being simple.

    • Deceptichum@kbin.social
      431·
      9 months ago

      If you put in lots of effort and hard work, you can make it easy to avoid having to put in lots of effort and hard work.

    • JackGreenEarth@lemm.eeEnglish
      7·
      9 months ago

      Well, if you have a techy person take an hour to set it up for you, it can be simple for the end user, without them having to do anything technical themselves.

    • DreamButt@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      9 months ago

      Welcome to this community in a nutshell. Any amount of friction is enough to lose significant portions of your audience

    • OpenStars@startrek.websiteEnglish
      614·
      9 months ago

      That’s… not the point of the meme though:-).

      If you want simple, and have an entire IT staff backing you, get Windows.

      If you want simple and want elegant, get Mac OSX.

      Linux is not that simple (unless everything just happens to work), but it is nice for people to have choices:-).

      Pro-Tip: don’t do what others tell you - find what works best for you and enjoy it:-).

  • nebula42@lemmy.today
    19·
    9 months ago

    This is deadass making me reconsider dnd, thanks /gen

    Also, with dnd, you buy a physical book and you own it forever right? Physical books don’t have DRM, unless there’s something I’m missing.

    • Lianodel@ttrpg.networkEnglish
      20·
      9 months ago

      Correct about physical books, and I doubt physical books are going away. However, WotC has been leaning towards digital distribution, and hired on people with experience in software-as-a-service.

      By all means, keep playing the version of the game you own! But it looks like the future of D&D might make a lot of content available to rent, not to own. Hopefully I’m wrong, but honestly, there are plenty of other games that let you own your stuff.

    • Sotuanduso@lemm.eeEnglish
      9·
      9 months ago

      From what I know, it’s not an exact match, unless there’s something going on with virtual tabletops.

      The ownership difference I know of matters more for third party creators. Under D&D’s OGL (at least the new versions,) Wizards can own anything created with it (or so I’ve heard.) Pathfinder’s ORC (used for 2e at least) is explicitly unowned by Paizo so they couldn’t even put such a clause in there if they wanted to.

      Other than that, both licenses pretty much allow you to mod as you wish, and publish said mods for profit.

  • imPastaSyndrome@lemm.ee
    141·
    9 months ago

    I mean… no one can take my physical d&d books or pdfs or miniatures…? I’m sure I could ‘buy’ online copies of stuff but why would anyone?

    • Lianodel@ttrpg.networkEnglish
      151·
      9 months ago

      True, but (a) IIRC, not all 5e books are even available as PDFs, and (b) D&D seems to be leaning towards a service business model. I doubt they’ll get rid of books entirely, but still, Paizo has a more straightforward “buy the thing, own the thing” approach.

  • mogoh@lemmy.ml
    13·
    9 months ago

    I don’t know. I played 3.5 and 5e and I like the 5e rules way more than 3.5. Isn’t PF very close to 3.5?

    • vithigar@lemmy.ca
      12·
      9 months ago

      First edition Pathfinder was very close to 3.5. Many people called it 3.75e.

      While some of the D&D bones are still there, Second edition Pathfinder is very much its own thing.

  • Scrof
    111·
    9 months ago

    Golarion is also a way more badass setting than Forgotten Realms!

  • euphoric_cat@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    101·
    9 months ago

    huh, I was introduced to pathfinder over dnd by one of my highschool teachers, didn’t know it was actually more based then real dnd

    • Kata1yst@kbin.social
      23·
      9 months ago

      The base ruleset (SRD) only. Everything else is OGL, which has proven to be as open as Wizards Hasbro wants to make it.

      • Lianodel@ttrpg.networkEnglish
        18·
        9 months ago

        Yeah. On the face of it, it’s a good move, but the full story is far worse.

        • They “updated” the OGL to be far more restrictive, impose unsustainable fees past a certain level of gross profit, and would grant WotC the full right to use, sell, and even license your work to others, irrevocably.

        • They tried to de-authorize the original OGL retroactively, fully against the spirit and practice of the license, using some legal chicanery. While the OGL 1.0a was perpetual, it didn’t use the word irrevocable. (WotC’s rights to your content, of course, were clearly put in irrevocable terms).

        • They only moved to CC-BY after public outcry. While the results were good, it was for PR, not out of the goodness of their hearts.

        • There’s a new edition coming anyway. Unless they surprise me and put it under CC-BY as well, I’m betting they’ll try again to use a really restrictive license.

        Also, even though WotC walked back from de-authorizing the OGL 1.0a, the damage was done. Every publisher I’m aware of that had used it has since moved away from it entirely, with surprisingly little change to the product.

        • Kata1yst@kbin.social
          9·
          9 months ago

          No argument here. I’m a PF2e player since beta and won’t touch HasWizards products with a 10 foot disintegrate.

          • Lianodel@ttrpg.networkEnglish
            5·
            9 months ago

            I will, begrudgingly, when my friends run a game. Playing it is okay, running it is a nightmare, and I really don’t want to spend money on this game.

            It’s a shame, because D&D has been a huge part of my life, but nowadays, when I want to play D&D, the best way to do it isn’t to use D&D.