I believe you compare that BG3 is Forgotten Realms the most popular Dnd Universe. Example Solasta is Badlands less popular then Forgotten Realms.
BG1 and BG2 were both Forgotten Realms world.
Pathfinder 2 does it wrong. No multiplayer and they have stuff that do not belong to Dnd like A. Mythic spells and abilities? Really I doubt that exist in Pathfinder Pen and Paper. B. You can control an army like in Heroes strategy games. I am sorry but this was not going to be a strategy game. C. The world is less popular then Forgotten Realms Dnd.
Hey. I wasn't talking to you. You missed my entire point and twisted it into something else anyway, but you do you.
Now I understand why some of the people more in favor of Larianisms get ticked off at purists, because lo and behold, we finally have an actual purist here. Either way, you're kinda barking up the wrong tree, derailing a thread comparing two cRPGs over semantics about what should or shouldn't be considered official material for the sake of adapting mechanics into these games.
Yes indeed I am happy many times to be person that is traditional that no want everything change and consider all changes to be good. Let not go offtopic politics with that logic however in DnD talk see below.
However in Elves are not Elves thread RagnarokCzD that have same as your Avatar picture wanted REALLY that Elves should be FAT and have BEARDS perhaps not every Elf, but there should be many such Elves. Of course I am against it. Perhaps slightly little bit fat is possible for some old Mage Elf, but that would indeed be very rare. Elves are different from humans and I am not going to complain if I see fat humans in Baldurs Gate city.
No I not against fat people in real life. I simple think Elves are very different from humans in DnD that simple. I realy dont care if people have beard or a fat in real life they can still be my friends. For example I did not like Windows 8 but I did like Windows 10 and I am not against Windows 10 as new Windows. While Windows 7 was fairly good, but the Windows 10 OS starts Windows faster then old Windows 7.
I am not against everything NEW.
I did like DnD 3.5 , Pathfinder is fairly ok without Mythic Spells. DnD 4th I did not like they removed lots of dice rolls and made it very difficult rules. Wizards of Coast got the feedback and DND 5th again have the dice rolls and more simple to play and learn rules then Dnd 4th and less time sink also since more simple. DnD 5th edition is fine.
Let me explain why I am against Mythics Spells in DnD and Pathfinder 2? A. They are to powerful. Does not make much sense to use much spells from CORE book so much at least since when Mythic spells are available since they Mythic spells are so powerful. B. Pathfinder is like Dnd 3.75 little bit more stuff then DnD 3.5. With Mythic it becomes even more difficult not necessary for me but for someone that have do not know Dnd rules really. Even youtuber Wolfheart mentioned that he find Pathfinder 2 rules sometimes a bit to overwhelming to much to understand and to much choices. C. One friend of mine (not my brother he knows Dnd rules well) does not like if learning curve is tough and there is lots of information to choose from in a game.
It is subjective taste.I have always liked more the journey being low-medium level and not like level 20 and on top of that Mythic Spells super powerful almost like a demigod. If talking about MMO:S then my logic is quite the opposite, but this whas about DnD and not a MMO game.
Well and finally when they skipped adding Multiplayer to Pathfinder 2 they added that you can control a freaking army and play Pathfinder 2 as a strategy game. What has that controlling an army and playing a strategy game with armies to do with DnD? Nothing.
Fair enough that you don't like that stuff, you're entitled to your own tastes. For me I don't like multiplayer and genuinely, the mention of multiplayer in the description turned me HARD away from the idea of picking up Neverwinter Nights when I was looking back at old crpgs. However I think you're overstating things to say that WotR "does it wrong". For one thing, the only "right" way for any creative endeavor is the way that works at the time for the occasion. Also, what is the "it" that Pathfinder is doing wrong? It's not trying to be Baldur's Gate. It's trying to expand and be its own thing within the genre that Baldur's Gate created. There's room for more stuff in the genre, same as how there's a boatload of variations within every other genre of games.
Regarding your feelings about Mythic spells, I think that in general you're right that if they were just a part of any old D&D/Pathfinder game then they probably would feel out of place. But WotR is a campaign specifically built around mythic paths and the abilities they grant. It's a game made for a different level of play. I imagine it's the same as in tabletop, they're a resource for those who want to experience a different, higher level of play than the default. They're not going to be good for every campaign, but if the campaign is constructed with those mythic spells in mind, then they can create a very fun new experience. Yet even then, it's an experience that some people, like you, aren't going to be interested in. WotR is a game that's ABOUT your character becoming a demigod. There is without question room for a game like that in the genre. It's not going to be for you, but it's going to be for a lot of other people, and those people aren't going to be wrong for liking it. Same goes for the army command feature. They're experimenting with integrating different kinds of gameplay and seeing what that creates. Maybe it'll work, maybe it won't. It will definitely work for some people more than others.
