Suffering and success.

  • quortez@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    227
    ·
    11 months ago

    Hasbro being the worst, yet again

    BG3’s only sin is having to be tied to the worst owner in tabletop gaming. Thank god Larian is independent.

    • sheogorath@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      58
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Larian pls make a new series based on the Pathfinder ruleset. I think the success of BG3 has helped the mainstream to get used to DnD ruleset. Although Pathfinder is more complex, I think they have the chops to make it more accessible to the masses.

        • bob_lemon@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Pathfinder was created as an updated version of D&D 3.5, which was very complex. PF food streamline parts of it, but ended up just as complex at some point, mostly due to the massive variety of options available through splat books.

          Meanwhile, D&D 5e was released to be much less complex by getting rid of stacking bonuses and the vast majority of math.

          Parhfinder 2 (which I have not actually played yet) did not do that. They opted for streamlining the existing system by combining several similar subsystems into one (i.e. everything is a feat now). But the math is still there.

          • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Parhfinder 2 (which I have not actually played yet) did not do that. They opted for streamlining the existing system by combining several similar subsystems into one (i.e. everything is a feat now). But the math is still there.

            I disagree. I’ve played 5E and GM PF2E (so I’m biased, but informed). In PF2E there’s no stacking bonuses of the same type, and there’s only 3 bonus types now.

            Also, while there’s a ton of feats, Paizo didn’t just toss everything into feats.

            PF2E is built off of a few frameworks for subsystems, one of which being character creation. There’s also the monster creation framework which allows homebrewing creatures and encounters that follow challenge rating suggestions. There’s even guidelines for building your own subsystems for thibgs like investigation, chases, research, etc. That are easy to learn get you fairly close to what Paizo would design themselves.

            Meanwhile, the streamlining of 5E that you’re hinting at is WotC stripping out almost all character options. I always got tired of D&D campaigns by level 5 because your biggest meaningful choices are at 1st and 3rd level unless you start making multiclass abominations. And there’s also little support for GM’s, requiring each one to come up with their own rules for things like how ships work or designing magic items.

            I’d rather have a system like PF2E that provides options, because you can always choose to ignore them and build your own thing. If you’re playing 5E, you don’t have that choice

        • Lianodel@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          11 months ago

          Eh, yes and no.

          Pathfinder 1e was pretty much just straight-up continuing D&D 3.5e, but with some tweaks. Pathfinder 2e overhauled a lot of stuff, often simplifying things, but still pretty complex.

          Compared to D&D 5e, Pathfinder has more rules, but those rules often make things easier, or (IMO) get you more return for the effort. So, for example: The feat list is bigger and more complicated, but in practice, it means you only need to look at a handful of them when you level up, which is easier (and the rules give you guidelines for swapping things out if you don’t like them). The monk has more decisions to make with stances and attack types, but that’s… kind of what you want with a monk to make combat interesting. There are rules for boats, and holy shit how does 5e not have rules for boats.

          The last example might sound silly, but it’s part of what convinced me to switch. It’s an annoying omission in and of itself, but also speaks to a broader pattern of 5e just not supporting Dungeon Masters, letting them fix the either broken or incomplete rules, or else take the blame for them. Pathfinder actually supports Dungeon Game Masters, as though their time, effort, and fun were just as valuable as anyone else’s. /rant

          Pathfinder 2e is what I’d play if I wanted something like 5e, but runs differently. If I wanted something similar, I’d pick something else, but that’s a longer, even more off topic discussion to go into unprompted. :P

        • godot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Pathfinder was to get around WotC dropping D&D 3.5. Paizo was started by veteran D&D writers to sell adventures, which they still do as adventure paths, rather than a system. When WotC updated to 4e, meaning no more print books that Paizo could reference in their adventures, Pathfinder was a way to print new 3.5e PHBs and Monster Manuals.

          Paizo didn’t initially change much in PF1e. There were a few balance tweaks. The books were better laid out than 3.5. The players did the math on things like combat maneuvers in advance. In practice the game played pretty much the same, my groups jumped over seamlessly.

          Having run and played both, I do think Pathfinder 2e is counterintuitively simpler in play than 5e D&D. 5e plays fluidly almost immediately, move and act. PF2e is pretty demanding for the first hour or three, the three action economy and Conditions ™ are an armful, and many players need to unlearn some D&D habits. Once a player has below average system mastery PF2e is as fluid as 5e. Beyond that PF2e shines. The rules scale better to complex scenarios, giving players more clear options of how they could act and giving the GM a better framework to figure out exactly what someone needs to roll. I also think it’s easier for players to go from average to good system mastery in Pathfinder, it’s mostly just learning how to optimize their character and learning more conditions and spells that work in the framework the player already understands.

          For new players in session 1 D&D is simpler, in session 5 Pathfinder pulls even or maybe ahead, and in session 50 Pathfinder still sort of works where D&D falls apart.

          PF2e character customization, though, is much more complicated, which some people like and others do not.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            PF2e also makes healing up matter. Long rests in D&D5e are too easy to reset everything.

        • bouh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yes it is. Pathfinder made for builders who want to create a character with hundreds of options to choose from. It is rule heavy in the tradition of dnd 3rd edition. Pathfinder 2e is much more refined, but I doubt they went away from this philosophy. It’s still very rule heavy.

        • sheogorath@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I played em both and even did a secret ending run. Love both but it’s based on PF1e and it’s still built with RTWP by default. I love the various origin characters that Larian made for BG3 and D:OS2 that made your party members feel like real characters that have their own motivations unlike other RPGs that have your companion to be more like henchmen.

      • Tarcion@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        This would be my absolute dream. I loved BG3 but the weakest part of me was being based on D&D 5e. PF2 is just a better system in pretty much every way imo.

        If they could make a PF2 CRPG, that would be incredible.

      • griefreeze@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Any chance you might be able to give some highlights of what you consider significant differences between 5e and PF1/2 (your choice)? My only experience is 5e tabletop and BG3.

        • caseyweederman@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          PF2 quick highlights:
          Action economy. You get three actions and can spend them however you want. Attack three times? Sure! (Note: there’s a -5 penalty for the second attack and a -10 penalty for the third attack on the same turn (note: some feats can mitigate this eg. one that drops them to -3 and -6 respectively)). Move three times? Yeah! Move attack move? Attack move attack? Cast a spell (typically consumes two actions) and then attack? Sweet. Got a feature on your spell where you can funnel more actions into it for a bigger effect? Very cool.
          Degrees of Success: Roll more than ten below the DC? Oof, that’s not just a miss, that’s a miss where you also fall on your ass. Ten or more over? That’s a critical! You get sweet (and clearly defined) bonus effects. Roll a natural 20 or 1? That bumps you up or down a success tier instead of being an automatic failure or success. You might just be turning a critical miss into a regular miss on a 20 (given extreme DCs) or even a regular miss into a hail mary shot, like Bard hitting that gap between Smaug’s scales.
          Counteract as a broad mechanic: Counterspell is now just one implementation of a greater and robust counter mechanic, wherein you make a bid and possibly get a better result. The counterspell example is that you can counter a spell of up to three spell slot levels higher than the one you spent just by rolling high (see degrees of success above). This is also how you disarm traps and dispel auras.
          Counterspell itself gets way more granular. It is very different depending on which class you’re pulling it from, which means it feels way more satisfying, not having been smashed into a one-size-fits-all shape. You can build it up with feats, playing with the resource economy and requirements. My personal favorite is a feat which allows you (GM’s discretion) to counter spells with thematically relevant spells, like fizzling a fireball with create water. It’s intricate, it’s interesting, you get way more control over your kit, and you get to feel really cool when you do cool stuff. Which applies to the system on the whole.

        • phynics@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          There are consistent rules that are written out pretty verbosely. This can be scary at first but also ‘generally’ prevents a lot of table discussion. There are tons of characters choice and it is pretty hard to make a low power/high power character; also encounter/monster building rules actually work. Price of this is that there are a lot of options that were balanced out of their fun. Thankfully they have been getting better at this.

          Personally I think 5e sits at a weird point. There are games like PF2, 13th Age, etc. that deliver better gaming frameworks with depth and there are better ‘simple’ games like WWN and numerous retroclones that provide the bare minimum and empower GM to improvise. Where as 5e has had an approach more like the former to the rules interpretation and character complexity, with tons of unofficial official rules clarifications and specific character, while having the actual rules written out more like the latter group providing very little guidance to how to use them. It awes with fun abilities yet provides little on how they interact. It is not a bad game if the GM knows what they want out of it, but most games I have been in was a disparate mix of ‘things others do’. A lot of the blame lies with the DMG.

        • bouh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Forgotten realms is basically the IP for standard fantasy. This is an enormous strength for an IP. Divinity doesn’t have this strength, it doesn’t speak naturally to everyone like this.

    • Diotima@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’ve been browsing older Forgotten Realms sourcebooks and the love that the authors put into those is amazing. It hurts to see D&D and the worlds I grew up loving destroyed by a soulless entity that cares only about profit.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        11 months ago

        If it’s at all of interest to you, there are a bunch of good novels set in the Forgotten Realms, too.

        There’s a pretty great thread from just a few years ago on the Candlekeep forums where someone read through every single book and gave a brief review of them. I can’t remember their opinion in great detail, but the biggest authors (Ed Greenwood and Bob Salvatore) were relatively lowly rated, while Elaine Cunningham and Erin M. Evans consistently rated much more highly.

        I’ve never read Cunningham myself, but I’ve read all of Evans’ FR novels and am a huge fan. Plan to read her non-FR novels once I’m finished with what I’m currently working through, if I can find a copy that’s not from the rainforest company.

          • Zagorath@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Was trickier to find than I thought because of the unorthodox title. But here it is.

            It’s a 35 page thread with others chiming in with their thoughts as the original author makes his way through the list, and some summing up on pages 33 & 34. And technically still ongoing as new books slowly trickle out, though most of it was finished in 2020.

            Unfortunately it looks like the author never fully finished his wrap-up either. He said he was gonna do favourite series, fav individual books, fav authors, and misc comments, but only ended up doing the first two of those as far as I could see.

            Personally I mostly read through the reviews of Evans’ books back when I first saw the thread, and my vague recollection was that he/others liked them and mentioned also liking Cunningham, but I could be misremembering.

            Happy to provide my own review of Evans’ work if interested.

            • wootz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              Thank you!

              I’m in a rare slump of not knowing what to read. I’ve been meaning to dig in to forgotten realms for a while, and wanted to start out with Drizt, but heard mixed things.

              This is wonderful, thanks!

              • Zagorath@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                No worries! If you didn’t already see it, I wrote a fairly lengthy review of the Evans novels in response to another user a few comments down in this thread.

                Regarding Drizzt, my understanding is that “mixed things” is basically right. Some of the books are very well-liked, and others are not so much. My own personal experience is only that I’ve tried listening to the audiobook of The Companions, the Drizzt novel which is the first of The Sundering series. But I’ve ended up bouncing off of it twice, just not really caring about the characters.

  • rigatti@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    176
    ·
    11 months ago

    Hasbro continuing to make shit decisions on behalf of WotC, the only sector of the company keeping it afloat.

  • arc@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    93
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    The same Hasbro that tried to make a land grab for all D&D derivative content by changing their Open Game License to grant them irrevocable, perpetual rights to it. This is not a nice company as they demonstrate time and again.

    So maybe it’s time the RPG community stopped thinking Hasbro are ever going to change, mourn for what D&D has become, but move onto something else.

  • half_built_pyramids@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    For the likely large overlap this audience might have with dnd, it didn’t make 100mil a year so it gets to eat shit. It doesn’t help that the video game license isn’t counted in that total. Other Hasbro brands do make 100mil a year.

    I thought magic was one. It is surprising to see layoffs there.

    Anyway, of course a corporation does evil shit. The only moral is the line going up.

    • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      11 months ago

      MtG made over a billion dollars. From what I can see WotC, products/services/licenses, make up over 3 billion of Hasbro’s 5.something billion revenue.

      • half_built_pyramids@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yeah, card crack is real. They’ve been whaling and getting kids into gambling since the 90s. Don’t know why lay offs there. Line go up just a little more probably.

        • Holyginz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          11 months ago

          It’s not that. It’s that the fewer people they have to pay the more money they get to keep. It’s incredibly short sighted and self destructive. But they don’t care at this point.

          • heyoni@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            That or they’re planning to lean on generative ai to produce content

        • Diotima@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yeah, my partner really likes the art but we’re both aware that MtG was just the real world precursor to the current micro-transaction culture.

  • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    laying off 1,100 employees as a way to "modernize our organization and get even leaner

    Yeah because that’s what we want of the ones in charge of publishing, administering and providing support for some of the most played games in the world now and historically: leanness! The fewer people to take care of important things, the better! 🤦

    I know that he’s talking to investors rather than players, but come on! Also, there’s nothing “modern” about stupidly trying to increase profits via mass layoffs without expecting blowback and for quality to suffer. That’s some 1700s bullshit right there.

    • Flat Pluto Society@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’ve survived layoffs at companies where we were told that following the cuts, we were going to get leaner and more agile and more efficient.

      I’m sure you’ll be just shocked to learn that what actually happened is I ended up doing twice as much work to pick up the laid off people’s slack, and at the end of the year got a smaller bonus than the previous year, along with a raise that didn’t cover inflation. Overall company profits, of course, hit a record high.

    • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Also, when your company is ailing (read: Not making more profit than last year, no matter what ocean of money your managers are swimming in), fire the good parts. That’ll fix it!

    • unreasonabro@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      spoiler alert though, it’s literally everybody. because everyone else is doing it, it’s not possible to survive as a business in a competitive space without doing, for lack of a better word, the devil’s work. It will take a major social disruption to change this, but it won’t happen in an organized fashion because we as a species are pathetic. The disruption will be the end of the world - North America cracking down the middle due to all the fracking, the Greenland glacier sliding into the ocean all at a go, something like that. FAFO endgame shit, due any minute now anyway.

      • Patches@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        11 months ago

        Okay while I agree it’s everyone.

        It is absolutely possible for a single corporation to not be the shittiest possible person in existence. They just can’t be public.

        The stock market is the worst thing to ever happen to this country.

      • The_Lurker@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        One solution is to support government regulation of these industries. Deregulation is the cause of much of this crap.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Well, if you deregulate patents and copyright (that is, abolish them, with only trademark laws remaining), then I’d expect only positive results.

    • ██████████@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      11 months ago

      Honestly its kind of extremely crumby that hasbro owns the wizards

      The DnD games from the 90s on steam went up in price because of the success of BG3 they are now on sale forbtheir old price lol

    • Nine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      11 months ago

      Samsung, Ubisoft, Epic, Chiquita, Dole, Apple, …

      Pretty much any big corp is gonna be really shitty…

  • KeenFlame@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    11 months ago

    But what about the poor CEOs? Did they get their Christmas bonus? Think of the children!!

    • grayman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      Thank you! The CEOs’ children need Maseratis, boarding school, college, jet fuel to pedo islands, and so many other necessities! We can’t let them suffer!

    • naticus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      I kept trying to figure out the joke about the name Swen Vincke and was failing. Cocks. It was right there in front of me everyone. It was Cocks.

  • joker125@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    11 months ago

    Haven’t played BG3 but wtf sense does it make to layoff these team(s)?

    Plenty of people paid for the game and enjoyed it and it won GOTY.

    • cam_i_am@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      66
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      You misunderstand. Larian is the company that made the BG3 video game, and they haven’t laid people off.

      However it’s a licensed game. Baldur’s Gate and D&D are IPs that are owned by a company called Wizards of Coast. And Wizards is owned by Hasbro. Hasbro is forcing layoffs at Wizards, specifically on the D&D team because it doesn’t print money as efficiently as say, Magic the Gathering does.

      The people at Wizards, i.e the people who actually make D&D are no doubt passionate wonderful people. But Hasbro (and probably some of the Wizards management) are awful corporate parasites determined to suck every last penny from their properties.

      They don’t give a shit how loved a product is, if it’s not making $100M per year then it’s basically worthless to them and they won’t fund it. So layoffs happen.

    • Kakaofruchttafel@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Larian Studios is not owned by anyone. The Wizards of the coast team that Larian worked with has been laid off

    • Ophy@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      He’s not talking about Larian, he’s talking aboutbthe actual D&D team at Hasbro and Wizards of the Coast. Hasbro got a new CEO last year and the way they’ve been operating certain business units like WotC has changed dramatically, coupled with massive layoffs across many Hasbro subsidiaries. All he’s saying is the DnD team at WotC now is completely different to the one that Larian knew as they developed BG3.