I’m out of the loop, what has wotc been fucking up?
Comment on Baldur's Gate 4 Isn't Next For Larian; Something Bigger Is Coming | Spot On | Gamespot
Mongostein@lemmy.ca 6 months agoThanks for expanding on my point.
They don’t need WotC as they keep fucking up. Other RPG systems are becoming more and more popular.
Maybe they can partner with Paizo and make the next Pathfinder game, although I’d feel bad for Owlcat because their games have been great too.
systemglitch@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Anticorp@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Hasbro pulled a bunch of typical big corp enshitification tactics with their licensing and digital assets over the last couple of years.
mihnt@lemy.lol 6 months ago
They’ve also tanked the used market for people. 2 decks I had that I paid way too much for aren’t worth the cardboard they are printed on now.
Soggy@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Moral of the story: run proxies. Speculators and investors ruined the market, WotC just let them do it. (Also, fuck the secondary market and the reserve list. It’s cardboard. Some of us just want to play)
ampersandrew@lemmy.world 6 months ago
For similar reasons as D&D, I doubt they’d license someone else’s system either, but I could be wrong.
Mongostein@lemmy.ca 6 months ago
True, the Divinity games were plenty of fun with their own system
Cethin@lemmy.zip 6 months ago
I agree, but Piazo seems like much better partners. I wouldn’t be surprised if they’d let them make the game for no fee, just license out the rules to try to make the system more well known and popular. Pathfinder 2E is the better system without a doubt, but people are used to D&D5e, so having something out there to bring new people in would be huge for them.
WarmSoda@lemm.ee 6 months ago
I don’t know. The Owlcat games have a really deep system that Divinity and BG3 don’t have. Is that just because of the pathfinder ruleset? Or does Larian do better with simpler systems? I don’t have an answer to those questions. It might be cool to see a BG3 “version” of Pathfinder, but I think it would lose something in the process.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 months ago
The visuals out of Larian run laps around Owlcat. But that comes at the expense of depth, as each asset takes more time to develop.
It’s two different design philosophies creating two very different kinds of experience. Owlcat makes more of a complex digital board game while Larian has muddled a strategy format with a dating sim.
ampersandrew@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I’ve played Baldur’s Gate 1, Baldur’s Gate 2, and Planescape: Torment on 2nd edition rules. I’ve played Baldur’s Gate 3 on 5th edition rules and started playing tabletop 5th edition. I’ve played Pillars of Eternity 1, as I understand it largely inspired by 3.5 edition rules, and the first 10 hours of Pillars of Eternity 2, which I assume is now iterating on its own offshoot. I understand Pathfinder to largely be D&D 3.5. If that’s the case, and it’s in the ballpark of what Pillars of Eternity 1 is, I’ll take 5th edition any day of the week, but if you’d like to explain to me briefly why I might be wrong, I’m listening. Compared to how the 2e games and the Pillars games handle spells of different levels, 5e’s upcasting seems like a godsend, for instance.
Cethin@lemmy.zip 6 months ago
One if the best changes for Pathfinder 2E is how actions work. D&D 5e has its a weird system of movement, action, bonus action, and then abilities that can add actions, but you can only cast one spell per turn regardless of if you have actions to use, except in some situations, and you can only use actions for some things sometimes, sometimes only once per turn. It’s just filled with exceptions because that’s not the original design intent but it’s tons of patches to make things function halfway decently.
Pathfinder 2E you have three actions per turn. Those can be used for anything always without exception. Every ability has a cost. For example moving is 1 action and can be done multiple times per turn, which makes things that displace enemies useful as they have to consume actions to get back into melee. Some spells may cost multiple actions, some very large ones can even require channeling multiple actions over several turns. It’s a very simple and intuitive system and you don’t need to remember thousands of exceptions like D&D5e.
Almost everything in Pathfinder 2E works like this. Things may be more complex to start with (which allows for choice), but you don’t need to remember tons of exceptions, so in total it’s simpler.
Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz 6 months ago
Games Workshop where’s their IP out to almost anyone, and despite being crappy about their mini stuff, they seem rather fair for electronic games.
KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
Because they know this is the only part of their business left. Which works for them.