Post/Author/DateTime	Post
ranagrande 08-27-07, 05:08 PM	I've never been very vocal here, and I don't even play that often anyway. Most likely, none of you know who I am or care about what I have to say, but I felt like posting anyway. From what I've seen, 4th Edition looks like a step backwards. One of the reasons that I've enjoyed this game is that I liked its complexity. I'm sure that I'm not the target audience, but some of my favorite game elements have been cited as some of the problems that they needed to fix in the new edition. This just seems like a mistake to me. If I wanted something simple and clearly defined, I'd go play a video game. And then there's Living Greyhawk. For the past few years, it's really been the only gaming that I've done. I never got to play as much as I would have liked to, but that was ok, because LG was always going to be there, and I would always be able to inch my characters along even if I only got to play a dozen or so mods a year. Obviously, that has changed now that the campaign is ending next year. I don't doubt that you have some big things planned for the grand finale, but I'm unlikely to see them. Due to various circumstances, it takes some serious effort and planning for me to even get to a (non online) game nowadays, and with the end in sight, I just don't think it would be worth it. So anyways, I won't be getting the new edition, and I'm pretty much done with the RPGA. To everyone who was involved in making LG what it was, thanks! It was fun while it lasted. :)
Greyson 08-27-07, 06:29 PM	So anyways, I won't be getting the new edition, and I'm pretty much done with the RPGA. To everyone who was involved in making LG what it was, thanks! It was fun while it lasted. I would urge giving the new edition and the new living campaign a chance. We don't know exactly what is changing. My experience, through twenty-seven years of play and all four editions, is that the game has always evolved into a better system. If the designers are taking aim at what worked best for you, it could be that those elements of the game get even better. Many of the same organizers, judges and players we have played Living Greyhawk with shall certainly be involved in Living Forgotten Realms. So, if you enjoyed Living Greyhawk, expect the same personalities and experiences in the new living campaign. You'll have new characters and new lands to explore. It should still be as much fun if ya make it to one event or one hundred. I know all of the same players and judges would love to see you in the future as the game evolves. The point is - don't give up!
clannagh 08-27-07, 07:34 PM	We don't know exactly what is changing. My experience, through twenty-seven years of play and all four editions, is that the game has always evolved into a better system. No No .. we want THACO back. THACO ruled .. it was the win !!! On a more serious note, the general dumbing down of games (to appeal to the masses who want to be able to casually play and still be 1337) is a worrying trend across the board the last 5 years or so. Its not a specifically WoTC issue.
MadVlad 08-27-07, 09:04 PM	I've never been very vocal here, and I don't even play that often anyway. Most likely, none of you know who I am or care about what I have to say, but I felt like posting anyway. From what I've seen, 4th Edition looks like a step backwards. One of the reasons that I've enjoyed this game is that I liked its complexity. I'm sure that I'm not the target audience, but some of my favorite game elements have been cited as some of the problems that they needed to fix in the new edition. This just seems like a mistake to me. If I wanted something simple and clearly defined, I'd go play a video game. And then there's Living Greyhawk. For the past few years, it's really been the only gaming that I've done. I never got to play as much as I would have liked to, but that was ok, because LG was always going to be there, and I would always be able to inch my characters along even if I only got to play a dozen or so mods a year. Obviously, that has changed now that the campaign is ending next year. I don't doubt that you have some big things planned for the grand finale, but I'm unlikely to see them. Due to various circumstances, it takes some serious effort and planning for me to even get to a (non online) game nowadays, and with the end in sight, I just don't think it would be worth it. So anyways, I won't be getting the new edition, and I'm pretty much done with the RPGA. To everyone who was involved in making LG what it was, thanks! It was fun while it lasted. :) That is one less paying customer. Wizards, the door has been opened....
LGMoses 08-27-07, 09:45 PM	No No .. we want THACO back. THACO ruled .. it was the win !!! On a more serious note, the general dumbing down of games (to appeal to the masses who want to be able to casually play and still be 1337) is a worrying trend across the board the last 5 years or so. Its not a specifically WoTC issue. A lot of people have been complaining about Games Workshop doing basically the same thing. Its not just Wizards.
_metz_ 08-28-07, 09:59 AM	A lot of people have been complaining about Games Workshop doing basically the same thing. Its not just Wizards. That is who he is talking about. Games Workshop has made its game more 'accessible' and as a result has taken all of the tactics and fun out of it. Now its literally just a toy collection, instead of a wargame.
UMiskatonic 08-28-07, 10:42 AM	I honestly don't know if 4e will be simpler meaning clear, or simpler meaning for simple people. I doubt anyone else does either. I could seriously advocate for some simplicity/clarity, including: Putting the mounted combat rules in one place, instead of spread out among the ride skill, the mounted combat feats, and the mounted combat section. Clarifying exactly what hide in plain sight does, and including that information in with the hide skill. Does the sniping modifier work for melee attacks or not? Can I trip a flying creature? If I do, what happens? Clarifying when a grappling creature does damage. Is it on the first round, or the second? How does that change with improved grab and improved grapple feats? What does 'trained for war' mean, and how do I get there?
ankhwearer 08-28-07, 12:58 PM	On a more serious note, the general dumbing down of games (to appeal to the masses who want to be able to casually play and still be 1337) is a worrying trend across the board the last 5 years or so. Its not a specifically WoTC issue. Not all simplification is for the purposes of appealing to the masses. My table of 20 year plus veterans groan in actual pain over the many things that cause the game so grind to a stop. My players don't want to wait while one person rearranges their spells for the day. Especially when this takes 15 or more minutes of risk analysis at 12th level and higher. My players don't want to wait while rules for interactions between unusual monster abilities and unusual spells have to be looked up online. My players don't want to look up rules in four different places, such as encounter starting distances. And, my players don't want to get into protracted arguements about the intentions and meanings of new rule items that did not follow the format of previous rules items; such as alternate class abilities for monks. The stated goal of the D&D 4e design team is to streamline play. It's interesting that everyone things that this means streamlining the rules. In 3.0, the actions of looking up a THAC0 and calculating all of the mods to the die roll each time it was rolled were streamlined. Instead, all of the math was done ahead of time by writing the attack modifier on the character sheet and just adding it to the die roll. The complexity of the rules was "front-loaded" so that it did not interfere with the actual play time. If spell selection took 24 hours of game time (or even a week) for your wizard instead of just one hour, the complexity of the game would remain the same, but changing spells would only happen outside of the time sitting around the table. I'm not saying this is the way they should go, but it provides a hypothetical example of how streamlining play does not require changes to the rules that would "dumb down" the game.
solbergb 08-28-07, 02:09 PM	A few examples of things that streamline play from 3.5 that don't detract from gameplay. Spontaneous casters don't slow down table play as much as prep casters. They do all their thinking at "levelup" time, which is away from the table in LG and in most other campaigns. They also tend to know their spells and don't have to look them up as much, because they researched them when leveling up and writing down the details is less daunting than the average wizard spellbook or any divine caster spell list. Any feat/spell that adds fixed bonuses or dice does not slow games as much as feats/spells that add variable effects (compare the paladin Smite to power attack). Both the smite and power attack scale with level, but the smite is recalculated at levelup, the power attack each time you swing. The tradeoffs are different (resources/day vs less chance of hitting) A variable effect feat that caps also tends to be less of a problem (compare combat expertise with power attack). When it caps, people are more likely to use it at either the maximum effect or at a value that's now obvious (Hm, he just hit me on an 18. Lets add two more points of expertise. Hm, he hit me on a "2". Forget the expertise, I gotta just hit this guy or move) Any effect that requires a table lookup is going to slow things down. Compare confusion and prismatic (X). The users of prismatic effects will often memorize the 8 possible results, or make a quick cheat-sheet. Confusion though, has unevenly distributed random results (sometimes 10%, sometimes 20% etc). Turning it into a d6 roll or a d8 roll would speed play. Reducing the turn undead check from two mechanics unrelated to normal combat+table lookup to one attack-roll like concept or even a saving throw mechanic would have speeded things up without reducing options.