pteryx

Have to agree about six. The classic D&D videogames didn't choose a party size of 6 by accident in their designs.

That being said, the push towards four instead definitely started in 3.0's playtesting, on the assumption that parties would have one of each basic archetype (warrior, rogue, arcane caster, divine caster) for some reason. It probably also had a lot to do with how scheduling a dedicated table becomes exponentially more difficult with each added player.

Essentially, yes.

PCs having grievances can happen too, but it tends to be more of an intermediate technique than a basic one for players, and dependent on them already having a solid understanding of the setting.

The first thing to understand about how to have NPCs with legitimate grievances be a thing in a TTRPG is to imagine the world as a real one and the NPCs as people within that world. If you're just thinking of the setting as a flat backdrop for gameplay and the NPCs as colorful questgivers whose protection is a thin excuse for the plot to happen, then you're not going to be thinking in terms of things like what needs various NPCs might have and why they're unfulfilled or violated.

Thing is, your typical clear-out-the-humanoid-tribe dungeon crawl could be considered pretty evil in its own right by modern standards. Just putting an emphasis on how much that old trope would actually involve disrupting lives and destroying families could be enough, depending on what she's going for.

@ICCrawler @Zagorath
You can still buy materials from their store. I think they're counting on that alone to prop it up.

@caseyweederman @Aielman15
Keep in mind that a lot of people outside the hobby have never even heard of Pathfinder. Even knowing that there's such a thing as *editions* of D&D is unusual outside the hobby.

I'm not saying that lore is unnecessary or undesirable. I'm saying that historically, it was never included as part of what counted as "crunch", and at the time was even taken to be its opposite.

Back in the '90s, when the term "crunch" arose, "fluff" arose alongside it to describe things like background detail and other things that would be called "lore" in a post-WoW world. So it's a little weird to see background detail held up alongside the other kinds in this article.

I'm thoroughly unconvinced by the argument that because giant corporations are doing evil things, the little guy ought to as well in order to "compete", and treating "AI" art as the only kind that will be posted either way.

It's meant to be a high bar forever.

"Generative AI" is a scam perpetrated by people who hate artists, while envying their capacity to create art, while also not understanding what art really is. Period.

So you're arguing so hard to replace artists because you already don't value them?