To that end, this thread is for suggestions on how to re-org the forums to accomplish the above goal.
This is not for discussions of the problems, only for re-org suggestions that might help solve the problem. While it will be difficult/impossible to discuss the re-org without discussing the problems, I would like this thread to focus on the re-org, not the problems.
Something needs to be done with the character buidling glut. And that something is calls 'Sub fora'.
Instead I would suggest dividing the Fundamentals section as follows:
- Arcane Classes
- Divine Classes
- Martial Classes
- Skills, Feats and Rituals
- Equipment and Treasure
- Races and Monsters
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- Rules Q&A
- General Discussion
More forums would be added as more power sources get introduced (Primal Classes, Psionic Classes, etc.)
I agree with Vaal about including a link to Previous Editions at the top of the General Discussions (and Rules Q&A) forums.
This very forum from:
"Discuss what's happening on the forums and other community business."
to:
"Come here to discuss the forums and any problems you may be having with them (personal and technical), or to find a directory of where many topics belong."
Of course then you would need to have a stickied directory for forums that may or may not contain actual links or just lists for each subforum of the type of things that belong.
Here's another suggestion. In this very forum, there should be a stickied thread called "Where Do I Post?" that should contain a discussion of where the most commonly misplaced topic should be posted. There could be a stickied link at the top of every forum.
Good plan. (even though people don't read sticky threads :P )
How about some description changes?
Also a good plan. As part of this, I would highly recommend that forums that are "edition neutral" (such as What's a DM to Do? and What's a Player to Do?) specifically spell it out in the description.
Question for Solice and/or Michelle: Can forum sections have a description? For example, can descriptive text be added to "D&D Fundamentals?"
Good plan. (even though people don't read sticky threads :P )
I know. It's frustrating. Decisions get made and people get upset. "You posted a thread in Community Business? Who does there? Why didn't you post a stickied thread"?
So we do. Then people say "I don't read stickied threads. Why don't you post an annoucement?"
So we do. The people say "Who reads the announcements? I didn't even notice the announcements section. You should have posted something in Community Business."
I am no fan of dividing Character Building Forums by Party role. I also see no need for the "Character Building" prefix on any forums.
Instead I would suggest dividing the Fundamentals section as follows:
- Arcane Classes
- Divine Classes
- Martial Classes
- Skills, Feats and Rituals
- Equipment and Treasure
- Races and Monsters
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- Rules Q&A
- General Discussion
More forums would be added as more power sources get introduced (Primal Classes, Psionic Classes, etc.)
I agree with Vaal about including a link to Previous Editions at the top of the General Discussions (and Rules Q&A) forums.
I can't agree with the power source based forums because every PH is going to recreate the glut that the role based forums create now on the front page.
I would have Character Building Main with Classes and Races as subfora. We had no trouble at all having a classes forum before even with the class rsuh that came at the end of 3.5
No powers and classes are inextricably linked. If that were true in Third, it would have been unmanageable as well.
I don't think a single Classes forum would work. I think it would be too busy.
I'm open to another way to group the Classes. Two or three forums should do the trick. I'm not a fan of subfora. Compare the Rules Q&A activity with what we had in DM Rules Counseling (the 3rd edition subforum that served the same role).
People don't see subfora and rarely post there.
I know. It's frustrating. Decisions get made and people get upset. "You posted a thread in Community Business? Who does there? Why didn't you post a stickied thread"?
So we do. Then people say "I don't read stickied threads. Why don't you post an annoucement?"
So we do. The people say "Who reads the announcements? I didn't even notice the announcements section. You should have posted something in Community Business."
Above CB for any forum, there should be an announcement forum that select mods/admins can post in that are locked as posted.
This forum should have thread not as a sticky, but that allow for seeing pst announcements for a long period of time. I guess as long as the archiver allows threads to exist without new posts in them.
This means the VERY first forum someone sees in an area will contain important forums information such as forum name changes, or downtimes, or organizational structure changes.
It does not mean everyone will read those announcements, but it does mean that they are easier to see and less excuse for people to miss them IF they visit the forums through normal channels rather than visiting through a direct link to a subforum or thread.
This does NOT mean the announcements structure that has them appear in EACH forum as a global announcement has to be removed, but it would give each section (another problem here) its own area for section specific announcements.
There are just too many sections on these forums.
MTG
D&D
AH
etc
All are related by WotC, but it makes for an administration and moderation nightmare having to separate all the things from each other and watch them all.
The mod helper program, or VCL/FL/FG/NG program here, is a good way to help handle it, but those helpers NEED more duties.
You need to know that you can trust these people to BE respomnsible in their actions AND unbiased, and these mod helpers should be able to do more than some of the things they can do now.
They need to be able to move/split threads from their areas, but at extreme times they also need to be able to moderate a post or maybe even just lock a thread for review or further moderation by a full fledged moderator.
Just having an area mod helper being able to lock a thread could prevent problems as it would not allow further discussion to continue.
Just post that the thread has been locked for review like the WizO, does and then lock it and let it actually be reviewed by the parties.
That with an actual clearer forum structure will go a LONG way to helping keep things civil, as it has done for so many other forums over the years.
I am no fan of dividing Character Building Forums by Party role.
-This, I can agree with. As a personal project, I've been working on translating some things from 4e into 3e, so that I can use them. One of the biggest problems I've encountered was figuring out where to post such queries as, you know, "What does X feat/power/spell to for Y class?", not knowing the terminology that is used on the boards.
- *****ing
- Moaning
- Trolling
- Talking
... and all threads and posts that are off-topic for a given forum be deleted immediately.
/snark
In all seriousness, I think we need a forum layout that results in less of a troll-trap in GD. Maybe give us C&C back (I know, I know. I threw up a little in my mouth typing that), just to create some separation.
The bottom line, though, is that the problems with the forums right now aren't really related to the forum titles or confusion about them. It's a handful of posters that will find worthwhile discussion wherever it happens to be taking place and drown it in their bile. Until that's taken care of, we can debate reorganization from here to doomsday and it won't make a bit of difference; they'll seek out the forum that has lively discussion and **** all over it.
#1 Create a completely edition neutral GD.
A couple of things-
What would go there? Most discussions when dealing with rules ARE specific to the edition.
Right here on this board, (Probably still a few threads down) there's people having problems on one such "edition free" board- the FR board. I don't think letting people "go at it" is the right thing to do. We need to keep the groups that have proven hostile to each other separate.
4e is the current edition, and that's what WotC wants to promote.
A couple of things-
What would go there? Most discussions when dealing with rules ARE specific to the edition.
Right here on this board, (Probably still a few threads down) there's people having problems on one such "edition free" board- the FR board. I don't think letting people "go at it" is the right thing to do. We need to keep the groups that have proven hostile to each other separate.
4e is the current edition, and that's what WotC wants to promote.
And yet the brand manager disagrees with you and thinks there should be an edition-bias free area to just discuss things about D&D like some, i don't know....general discussion area.
So maybe you don't know what WotC wants?
Of course you will likely have this post removed as the others in regards to this to hide and cover up the truth, as you did in the thread for Tiny Adventures even deleting Scott's own posts about it.
I was unaware until now that VCLs made decisions for the company WotC and what THEY want.
The brand manager isn't the community manager. They are separate departments. It's not up to the brand manager to make decisions for the community management department.
That's not to say the different areas can't work together and pass on ideas, suggestions and information. If brand wants to know what topics people are talking about, that's one thing. But to assume he's in charge of the boards is not correct.
How would you feel if he wanted an outright ban an all previous edition discussions?
But again, as far as I know, the brand manager is NOT in charge of the boards. The brand manager doesn't moderate them either.
That's like saying the VCL get to decide what books are published.
If you had read the Tiny Adventures threads you would understand, but you had all relevant content removed from it for whatever reason you chose.
The idea was Scott's when I spoke to him on the phone.
Have Ms Paige ask him personally and find out.
YO don't think a general general discusion belongs, but cannot see beyond that because you always proclaim what WotC wants to be FROM you.
You are NOT an employee of WotC so should not act like one.
There is TONS of things that could be discussed in a general general discussion area for D&D, but no matter what you will not hear it, and other beyond myself have stated it would serve a purpose, but you attack my post only. Why not also attack Zherog's posts while you are at it?
Or just accept that GZ is gone, and you cannot hide behind his ideals anymore, and things may be changing and you have little say in them and the entire forum might just have a say now.
Sorry, but your entire attitude since GZ departure has led me to think you bitter at the forums about it, or as many claim I am about 4th, you fear change in the forums.
a NEW GD would not take your GD away from you as a VCL, so WHAT really is your problem with it?
Why not post in the actual thread for it rather than a PM so ALL can see openly?
HEck, All I really want is a link to the Gamer Classifieds in GD. Maybe in OT as well, since those are the two forums such posts inevitably end up in.
One of my goals is to get a link at the top of the forum named "Find Players in your area HERE"
:D
If you had read the Tiny Adventures threads you would understand, but you had all relevant content removed from it for whatever reason you chose.
I had content removed, it was because it's off topic. The thread is about Tiny Adventures, not about the format of the boards. The posts removed were discussion on where the thread itself should go. That was derailing the thread.
The idea was Scott's when I spoke to him on the phone.
Have Ms Paige ask him personally and find out.
I'm sure they talk all the time. But I'm sure Ms Paige doesn't tell Scott how to run his department.
YO don't think a general general discusion belongs, but cannot see beyond that because you always proclaim what WotC wants to be FROM you.
You are NOT an employee of WotC so should not act like one.
Actually, in a round about way I am. You want WizOs to respond and answer questions. When I try to gain some understanding, you tear in to me. I'm sorry if I did anything that upset you. (Though, I admit I was looking for feedback as a VCL rather than a WizO.)
There is TONS of things that could be discussed in a general general discussion area for D&D, but no matter what you will not hear it, and other beyond myself have stated it would serve a purpose, but you attack my post only. Why not also attack Zherog's posts while you are at it?
I need clarification here. First, what tons of stuff? I was asking for specifics. Because edition free would mean edition free. No edition comparisons, no questions about specific rules. No mentioning specific editions. What's left? Anything that is "edition free" is already in the general board.
Instead of an answer, I get jumped on.
I'm also very flexable and I DO listen. I've got a lengthy track record to prove it. Not everyone gets their way, (Not even me!) but that's the way it goes.
You're asking for a board without supporting it with threads that go there. It's like the request for an Incarnum board. I flat out told people to make topics on the Magic and Spells board, and if it shows enough threads, we'd make one. People chose instead to complain that there's no Incarnum board. Such a board would have been dead, as apparently nobody really had anything to say about the subject.
I further don't see how asking "What would be posted there" as attacking your post.
The other thing I posted, in case it was overlooked was the fact that there's already an "edition free" board that's having serious problems. Ignoring this fact doesn't make it go away. They're saying it's not working.
Or just accept that GZ is gone, and you cannot hide behind his ideals anymore, and things may be changing and you have little say in them and the entire forum might just have a say now.
I have as much say as everyone else. Indeed some of the suggestions so far are pretty good.
Sorry, but your entire attitude since GZ departure has led me to think you bitter at the forums about it, or as many claim I am about 4th, you fear change in the forums.
In what way has my attitude "changed"? I certainly haven't noticed any change.
I also don't fear change. I've been through MANY of the forum changes. Started a few myself back in the day. And I'm not bitter.
a NEW GD would not take your GD away from you as a VCL, so WHAT really is your problem with it?
As I outlined in my original post, there's not enough unique content available for it. (Anything that doesn't fit the other topics goes in the current General board. Plus, there's a previous editions general board. We really don't need another.)
Second, as pointed out in my ignored post, there's an area that already is "edition free" and they're having serious issues. It's better to get those cleared up before starting another area, don't you think? Otherwise you'd face the same problems.
And Third, people won't be happy when their posts are moderated for being edition specific.
Why not post in the actual thread for it rather than a PM so ALL can see openly?
I'm sorry. It's an old habit of mine by looking out for people and trying not to embarrass them. It's my fault I wasn't as clear on the intent- to give you a chance to edit your post because everyone knows the brand manager is not the community manager. I was trying to help you save face there. Sorry. Won't happen again. :D
I'm not sure what your problem with me is, but I'm always available via PM to discuss it if you like. (I say that because people generally aren't interested in seeing things hashed out in public. Plus, it derails too many threads.)
4e General Discussion:
Post your general questions and comments about the new edition here. If you have a general question or comment about a previous edition of D&D, click here (linky to Prev Ed General) to post it.
The problem, of course, is that people that want to post something to hate on 4e will still do it right where they are currently doing it. The only thing that will stop this - as Batshido and others have stated - is heavier moderation. Still, when things calm down (someday ...), this will certainly be helpful to people that are unfamiliar with the board layout. And, honestly, I can't see any problem with labeling the 4e boards as such. They're for the new edition so there should be no problem sticking a 4e in 'em somewhere. Edition neutral boards should have no such label. Prev Ed boards should also have a lil' tag on 'em. It can't be too much work and it would help with new user navigation. And that's a good thing, IMO.
D&D Headquarters
.....Community Business
.....WotC Staff Blogs
.....Future Releases
.....GSL
D&D Fundamentals
.....Character Building: Defenders
.....Character Building: Strikers
.....Character Building: Leaders
.....Character Building: Controllers
.....Character Building: Hybrids
.....Character Optimization
.....Character Development
.....Monsters
.....Equipment and Magic Items
.....Rules Q&A
.....General Discussion
D&D Community
.....What's a DM to Do?
.....What's a Player to Do?
.....House Rules
.....Campaign & Adventure Workshop
.....Astrid's Parlor
.....Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
.....D&Di Announcements
.....Dragon General
.....Dragon Article Discussion
.....Dungeon General
.....Dungeon Adventures Discussion
.....Technical Discussion
.....D&Di General
D&D Worlds
.....Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
.....Running the Realms
.....Eberron
.....Other Published Worlds
D&D Previous Editions
.....Monsters and Races
.....Classes and Class Features
.....Equipment, Skills, and Feats
.....Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
.....Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
.....Previous Editions General
RPGs
.....RPGs General Discussion
.....d20 Modern and General
.....d20 Character Optimization
.....d20 Character Development
Related Topics
.....D&D Fiction
.....Play by Post Forums
I left off the Legacy Forums section at the end. I can add it if folks really need to see it when discussing another re-org.
I'll add my thoughts of how to re-do the organization in another post, so this one stays as clean as possible.
D&D Headquarters
.....Community Business
.....WotC Staff Blogs
.....Product Reviews
.....Future Releases
.....GSL
D&D Fundamentals
.....4e Character Building: Defenders
.....4e Character Building: Strikers
.....4e Character Building: Leaders
.....4e Character Building: Controllers
.....4e Character Building: Hybrids
.....Character Optimization
.....Character Development
.....4e Monsters
.....4e Equipment and Magic Items
.....4e Rules Q&A
.....4e General Discussion
D&D Community
.....What's a DM to Do?
.....What's a Player to Do?
.....House Rules
.....Campaign & Adventure Workshop
.....Astrid's Parlor
.....Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
.....D&Di Announcements
.....
.....
.....
.....
.....Dungeon/Dragon Article Discussion
.....Dungeon/Dragon General
.....Technical Discussion
.....D&Di General
D&D Worlds
.....
.....
.....Forgotten Realms
..........4e Forgotten Realms: Realmslore (Sub forum)
..........4e Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms (Sub forum)
..........Forgotten Realms: Previous Editions (Sub forum)
.....Eberron
.....Other Published Worlds
D&D Previous Editions
.....Monsters and Races
.....Classes and Class Features
.....Equipment, Skills, and Feats
.....Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
.....Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
.....Previous Editions General
RPGs
.....RPGs General Discussion
.....d20 Modern and General
.....d20 Character Optimization
.....d20 Character Development
Related Topics
.....D&D Fiction
.....Play by Post Forums
As other 4E worlds get updated, they too would take on the structure of the FR forum as I have indicated.
-- The "Related Topics" forum is darn near useless, because it's way at the very end. In my opinion, you want people to see those as soon as possible.
-- We don't make good enough use of linking forums.
-- While there's a general disdain for subforums, I think they can be used as an effective tool in some cases.
So, here's my proposed re-org.
D&D Headquarters
.....Community Business
.....WotC Staff Blogs
.....Future Releases
.....Product Reviews ([thread=1060447]Discussion about this potential new forum[/thread])
.....Related Topics
.....GSL
4e D&D Fundamentals
.....Character Building
..........Controllers
..........Defenders
..........Leaders
..........Strikers
..........Hybrids
.....Races and Monsters
.....Character Optimization
.....Character Development
.....Equipment and Magic Items
.....4e General Discussion
D&D Community
.....What's a DM to Do?
.....What's a Player to Do?
.....House Rules
.....Campaign & Adventure Workshop
.....Astrid's Parlor
.....Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
.....D&Di Announcements
.....Dragon General
.....Dragon Article Discussion
.....Dungeon General
.....Dungeon Adventures Discussion
.....Technical Discussion
.....D&Di General
D&D Worlds
.....Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
.....Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
.....Eberron: Eberron Lore
.....Eberron: Running Eberron
.....Other Published Worlds
D&D Previous Editions
.....Monsters and Races
.....Classes and Class Features
.....Equipment, Skills, and Feats
.....Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
.....Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
.....Previous Editions General
RPGs
.....RPGs General Discussion
.....d20 Modern and General
.....d20 Character Optimization
.....d20 Character Development
Related Topics
.....D&D Fiction
.....Play by Post Forums
.....[forum=347]RPG Gamer Classifieds[/forum]
.....[forum=369]The Marketplace[/forum]
.....[forum=518]Star Wars RPG[/forum]
.....[forum=837]Gaming Culture[/forum]
.....[forum=904]Creative Corner[/forum]
So here's what I did.
-- I included the discussed "Product Reviews" forum
-- I added a link to the related topics section up at the top; this allows that stuff to be seen (assuming people click it) while still keeping it "out of the way" at the bottom.
-- Renamed "D&D Fundamentals" to "4e D&D Fundamentals"
-- Made all the "Character Building" forums subforums. This is someplace I think subforums can be used to good effect. The "Character Building" forum would not allow any posts. People could see the subforums there, though. I did this because it helps "shrink" the list on the first page. That allows people to see more forum names without scrolling, and that really does help get traffic to other places.
-- Renamed "D&D General" to "4e D&D General"
-- Renamed "Monsters" to "Races and Monster". This gives a specific area to discuss the races -- something that doesn't exist right now.
-- Removed "Rules Q&A". This forum is, in my opinion, redundant with every other forum. There's no need for a separate forum, when you can just ask your rules related question in a more appropriate location. However... If it would be possible to arrange some sort of method of getting official answers (such as from the designers/developers), then I could see bringing that forum back and renaming it "Official Rules Q&A". Such a forum (in my opinion) would have to be moderated with a heavy hand; for one, there shouldn't be any discussion, just questions and their answers.
-- Renamed "Running the Realms" to "Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms". I like consistency, what can I say.
-- I split Eberron into two forums. This is in anticipation of the Campaign Setting release next year.
-- I added a bunch of stuff to "Related Topics"
So there ya go. My proposal.
- D&D Headquarters
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Product Reviews and Discussion
- Future Releases
- GSL
- Community Business
- D&D Fundamentals
Character Building: DefendersCharacter Building: StrikersCharacter Building: LeadersCharacter Building: ControllersCharacter Building: HybridsBase Classes- Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- Races and Monsters
- Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
- Abilities, Skills and Feats
- Rules Q&A
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- General Discussion
- D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
- What's a DM to Do?
- D&D Insider
- D&Di Announcements
- Dragon General
Dragon Article Discussion- Dungeon General
Dungeon Adventures DiscussionTechnical Discussion- D&Di General
- D&Di Announcements
- D&D Worlds
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: Previous Editions
- Eberron
- Other Published Worldsfn
- Birthright
- Council of Wyrms
- Darksun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Third-Party Published Worlds
- Birthright
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- D&D Previous Editions
- Monsters and Races
- Classes and Class Features
- Equipment, Skills, and Feats
- Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
- Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
- Previous Editions General
- Monsters and Races
- RPGs
- RPGs General Discussion
- d20 Modern and General
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
- RPGs General Discussion
- Related Topics
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
- D&D Fiction
fnI know I said I'm normally against subforums, and I still am. I'm willing to make an exception for the Other Worlds. The community there really wants it and I think it's worth making an exception to allow some infrequently trafficked forums. Also, I don't know if this is possible, but could we arranege it so the general "Other Published Worlds" forum also lists all of the posts located in its associated subforums? That way you can go to Other Worlds to see all posts about other worlds, but you can also go to the subforum if you only care about one of those Other Worlds? That might also be a way to increase traffic in all those forums.
Also, I don't know if this is possible, but could we arranege it so the general "Other Published Worlds" forum also lists all of the posts located in its associated subforums?
Yes, I'm pretty sure that's possible.
Yes, I'm pretty sure that's possible.
Then I think having the other worlds as subforums would be a best of both worlds (put intended) scenario.
-- I would be all in favor of lumping all the class discussion into one forum again. I was under the impression, however, that the dev team wanted it separated for some reason or other. Am I misremembering?
-- Does "Rules Q&A" serve any purpose? For example, if I have a question about a rogue's sneak attack, why should I ask in RQ&A rather than Classes?
-- I'd be interested in hearing from mudbunny about the proposed D&Di changes. I'm not familiar with the section to know if those are useful ideas or not.
-- I'd like to see the FR section stay "edition independent" though I understand how that can be a problem.
-- I'd suggest adding an "Other" to the Other Worlds section, to act as a catch-all for anything you missed. I'd make sure the description was clear that it would be OK to discuss third party settings there, such as the Midnight setting.
Using Zherog's list and mudbunny's editing format (and adding green to represent forums that are moved, but not otherwise changed), and my own mad [noparse][list][/noparse] skillz, here's my proposal:
- D&D Headquarters
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Product Reviews and Discussion
- Future Releases
- GSL
- D&D Fundamentals
Character Building: DefendersCharacter Building: StrikersCharacter Building: LeadersCharacter Building: ControllersCharacter Building: HybridsBase Classes- Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- Races and Monsters
- Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
- Abilities, Skills and Feats
- Rules Q&A
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- General Discussion
- D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
- D&D Insider
- D&Di Announcements
- Dragon General
Dragon Article Discussion- Dungeon General
Dungeon Adventures DiscussionTechnical Discussion- D&Di General
- D&D Worlds
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: Previous Editions
- Eberron
- Other Published Worldsfn
- Birthright
- Council of Wyrms
- Darksun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- D&D Previous Editions
- Monsters and Races
- Classes and Class Features
- Equipment, Skills, and Feats
- Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
- Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
- Previous Editions General
- RPGs
- RPGs General Discussion
- d20 Modern and General
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
- Related Topics
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
fnI know I said I'm normally against subforums, and I still am. I'm willing to make an exception for the Other Worlds. The community there really wants it and I think it's worth making an exception to allow some infrequently trafficked forums. Also, I don't know if this is possible, but could we arranege it so the general "Other Published Worlds" forum also lists all of the posts located in its associated subforums? That way you can go to Other Worlds to see all posts about other worlds, but you can also go to the subforum if you only care about one of those Other Worlds? That might also be a way to increase traffic in all those forums.
I really like the Product Reviews and Discussion forum. Especially if all the edition wars get moved there. Lets General Discussion be General Discussion, and people who want to argue and review have a place to do it and not bother anyone else. Forgotten Realms previous editions is also an interesting addition, particularly if that means that complaining about the current realms is off-topic in Realmslore. 4E Fundamentals needs to be cleaned up, but I'm not sure that what you propose is the best way to do it. It certainly is unacceptable how it is now. I don't like Races and Monsters. Maybe change it to Races, Abilities, Skills, and Feats.
Lock the edition wars, and leave them to rot.
the dev team wanted it separated for some reason or other. Am I misremembering?
It was based on traffic. But I think by separating out a multiclassing/paragon/epic forum, that won't be as much of a consideration.
Does "Rules Q&A" serve any purpose?
Very much so. Many rules questions touch on multiple areas. I.e., "Can my eladrin warlock use his warlock teleporting boost to boost his racial fey step power?" Some rules questions touch on none of the listed areas. "Can I take a free action with the standard action I get when I use an action point?"
Also, rules hounds are sort of a community, like house rulers and campaign designers. They deserve some lovin' too!
I'd be interested in hearing from mudbunny about the proposed D&Di changes. I'm not familiar with the section to know if those are useful ideas or not.
Traffic is so persistently anemic on those boards, I don't see why there shouldn't just be one general forum, as well as the three moderated forums currently existing.
I'd like to see the FR section stay "edition independent" though I understand how that can be a problem.
So did I, but I've been worn down by the grinding negativity. I just want it to stop any way we can.
I'd suggest adding an "Other" to the Other Worlds section, to act as a catch-all for anything you missed.
Sounds good.
So did I, but I've been worn down by the grinding negativity. I just want it to stop any way we can.
If people have negative feelings about the Realms as it now stands then so be it
-- I'd be interested in hearing from mudbunny about the proposed D&Di changes. I'm not familiar with the section to know if those are useful ideas or not.
My reasons for merging are due to the continually low numbers that the forums get.
I think that it is a good idea to keep a forum dedicated solely to the discussion of the articles int he magazines themselves. The subject lines will make it easy enough to distinguish between Dragon and Dungeon magazines. At the same time, I think that it is important to have another forum where people can make other comments on the magazines. Hence my inclusion of a Dragon/Dungeon General discussion forum.
The technical forum should stay, if only because as more pieces of DDI get released, I think that it will be important to have a forum where people can go for technical help.
Finally the General DDI forum for things DDI.
I have also edited my previous list to include the Reviews forum. Like Zherog, I like the idea of the forum, and agree with him that it
I think there's a lot of great ideas here so far. I think the best thing I've seen is that almost everything suggested so far is little "tweaks" rather than massive rearranging.
I'll see if I can combine my "favorite" ideas from all the suggestions into one list, as a new "proposal" from me. Probably later, though. My kids go to a new school this year (they re-zoned our school district), and today there's an open house for families who are new to this school. And I have a lot of questions that need answered -- like what time does the school bus pick them up? They haven't told us that yet. Heck - they haven't even told us if they're bus stop is the same location as last year.
In the meantime, I would love to hear more people chime in.
But wars should be locked and the participants warned. They don't contribute to the community.
I still believe that if it is created, Product Reviews and Discussion will become the primary home of the edition war. Those discussions are far more on topic there than they are in 4E General Discussion, and the name alone will draw in those who want to discuss the merits of different editions.
For what it's worth, if (when) Product reviews is created, as CrazyMonkey's helper/minion, I will be stamping out edition wars as fast as they show up. Granted, it would be a fine line to walk between a review and an edition war, but I think that it can be done.
For what it's worth, if (when) Product reviews is created, as CrazyMonkey's helper/minion, I will be stamping out edition wars as fast as they show up. Granted, it would be a fine line to walk between a review and an edition war, but I think that it can be done.
I have no problem with this, but you can be sure people who dislike 4E and want to post their negative reviews of it will be attracted to that forum, and other people there to discuss will disagree with them. Things tend to escalate from there. You also open up the can of worms letting people review/discuss previous editions in that forum as well.
If this change occurs, and when product review/discsussion threads come up in General Discussion, if those threads can be moved to the new forum, and "this discussion belongs in Product Reviews and Discussions" starts being a common sight, I'll be happy.
What he said. I've already volunteered to do similar work. I don't think it's too difficult to sent the tenor of a new forum right from the start. The key would be to have FAQs, guides, and so on drawn up and ready to go right when the forum goes live. The second key would be to stay on top of things, and react quickly to any issues.
edit: and by "he" I mean mudbunny.
I have no problem with this, but you can be sure people who dislike 4E and want to post their negative reviews of it will be attracted to that forum, and other people there to discuss will disagree with them. Things tend to escalate from there.
Negative reviews are not a problem. They are required and should be heard. The trick is differentiating between a negative review and an attack.
But the this is sending the thread off-topic, so I suggest, if you want to discuss it further, that it be moved to the Product Reviews Discussion thread.
Hellmute -- could you please provide several examples of topics that could be discussed in an edition-free general forum? Because honestly, I'm really having a hard time thinking of a topic that wouldn't already fit somewhere.
Anything/everything about D&D that does not revolve around a specific edition.
The fact people can not easily see this is why edition wars exist because they get caught up in love with one edition and think that everything must be about it.
I will start with the logical one and go from there:
Tiny Adventures - while a neat little DDI advertisement it really have nothing to do with ANY edition of D&D. What about other things like that? Where is the place to mention the things that inspired people to play D&D? Tiny Adventures should do that, as well as maybe MANY other things did for many people. Eragon, Harry Potter, Camelot, Santa Claus, who knows!
The cartoon series - It was based ON an edition, but has little to do with it in terms of the series itself.
The movies - Tom Hanks one maybe very little but people probably don't even know about it this day and age. The Movie and Wrath of the Dragon God neither were really focused in displaying any particular edition in them, though Wrath had much mention of 1st AD&D with Ghost Tower of Invernese and a few other known entities. Scourge of Worlds DID have a definite tie to 3rd with Regdar, Mailee, and Lidda, but was not really showing anything heavy enough to force one ruleset over the other.
Misc:
You have many things that still span every edition and are not pinned down by a single edition. Fundamentals has some "character building" forum for general character discussion....why? would that be the place to discus the background and share it with people from my OD&D character with Fundamentals being FOR 4th edition as the GD there is FOR 4th edition as webster has stated within this very thread?
What about sharing adventure ideas? Complete ones that do not require a workshop to finish? But actual plots people wish to share with other people? This may have been able to be done via a blog on Gleemax, but where can it be done on the forums?
DM/Player to do, asks questions and looks for answers no matter what the forums names are. Where is the place to just share edition neutral material with other users?
Can forums users ONLY think in terms of edition specific? There is probably more, but this early it is not something coming to me so quickly as the coffee pot has not even finished brewing (damn thing probably burned out on me.)
There is a LOT that would go into a general general discussion area, and on forums it IS a dumping ground for ALL things that don't have a specific place. Odds are many things around here already could be moved into it to allow the subject specific areas less traffick for ease of viewing, and provide space for more discussion of other things about D&D. Some in Off-topic tavern ARE D&D centric, but are there for the sake they have no place else to go that IS related to D&D:
McCain vs D&D & Obama
There was another one, but again too early to remember it exactly.
There is Astrid's for one subject that is effectively edition neutral, why can't there be a GD for other things that are edition neutral?
Actually, in a round about way I am. You want WizOs to respond and answer questions. When I try to gain some understanding, you tear in to me. I'm sorry if I did anything that upset you. (Though, I admit I was looking for feedback as a VCL rather than a WizO.)
You are NOT an employee of WotC in any way, and nothing you say is anything official about what WotC wants. You need to learn that and adhere to that part of the CoC and not try to impersonate WotC personnel.
You are a volunteer put in place by GZ. He is gone now, and so could your position be.
You want answers to questions about something I say in a thread, then first ask in the thread. Others may have the same question, and it saves time for ALL to be able to see the answer rather than 400 people having to get it individually.
Yeah you did upset me. You should have split the Tiny Adventurers to maintain relevant information about the "other" subject rather than have it destroyed. When I tell someone I will do something I do it, and YOU nor anyone else, better damn well make me look like I did NOT do it!
This GD discussion could have been had a week ago had the thread moderation been handled properly. Split the spin-off topic to its own thread, and continue the discussion of it in its own thread and allow the original thread to continue with its original topic.
Funny thing vBulletin 3 actually has this and a few other things built into it as I noticed on ENWorld when I went there to read about the layoffs and Batten case as well any new info about the GSL that may be hidden there. Another thing 3 has is combining posts from the same users so there is no "spamming" that some people around here do not understand the meaning of. On topic posts, are in no way spam for those who don't get it. this version also has the ability to split threads, but it seems no one knows how to use the forums that trun them except maybe WotC_Michelle, WotC_EricB, and the other person. ALL the mods need to be educated in how to do these simple function of the software. Then next time you can easily split a topic rather than just delete posts that may contain valid discussion value.
Other than that, a lot of what you've mentioned here seems to be a good fit to go on the "Off-Topic Tavern" forum. It's an ideal place to discuss movies, books, TV shows, etc.
I don't know what "tiny adventures" is...
Other than that, a lot of what you've mentioned here seems to be a good fit to go on the "Off-Topic Tavern" forum. It's an ideal place to discuss movies, books, TV shows, etc.
Tiny Adventure is some little silly thing on facebook. check D&D Insider news #3 and #4.
If those movies, etc were NOT about D&D. IN a D&D forum, there should NOT be anything considered off-topic that has D&D as the subject in any part.
Now someone wanting to talk about the 2008 Olympics and how Chiina cheated with underage athetes with other D&D community members, then that is something for Off-topic.
When the olympics are discussed in relation to figuring out how to incorporate them into a game, it then belongs into a D&D forum. Most likely the Adventure Workshop one.
Political views from incumbent presidential candidates is not really off-topic when those views express something towards D&D and IS about D&D so therefore is NOT off-topic to a D&D forum.....
D&D is the topic for the ENTIRE forum, so off-topic would mean anything that is NOT about D&D.
The MTGO thicket is for people to talk about MTG since you cannot in the game, but this fails elsewhere as a model and makes MTGO and their forums a vacuum closed case because they are the chat channel for the online game.
- Digital D&D I meant to include this in my proposal, but forgot. My next round will have it. This is where "tiny adventures" would be discussed. Any digital tool that's not D&Di would go here.
- D&D General As mudbunny said, this is one of the two places in the past where you would see discussion of things like the D&D movies, Tom Hanks' "Mazes and Monsters" movie, the D&D cartoon from the 80's, and so on.
- The Rec Room This is the other place where the movies, shows, etc would be discussed. Sometimes, the topics would be in both forums simultaneously, because it was OK to start a topic in two forums without it being considered "spamming."
And I still think those topics should be considered on-topic in both D&D General and the Off-Topic Tavern. And if we can get a Digital D&D forum recreated, that would give Tiny Adventures and other such things a place to live.
In the past (yeah, I know - but sometimes I like living there), those sorts of topics were covered in one of three areas:
- Digital D&D I meant to include this in my proposal, but forgot. My next round will have it. This is where "tiny adventures" would be discussed. Any digital tool that's not D&Di would go here.
- D&D General As mudbunny said, this is one of the two places in the past where you would see discussion of things like the D&D movies, Tom Hanks' "Mazes and Monsters" movie, the D&D cartoon from the 80's, and so on.
- The Rec Room This is the other place where the movies, shows, etc would be discussed. Sometimes, the topics would be in both forums simultaneously, because it was OK to start a topic in two forums without it being considered "spamming."
And I still think those topics should be considered on-topic in both D&D General and the Off-Topic Tavern. And if we can get a Digital D&D forum recreated, that would give Tiny Adventures and other such things a place to live.
Is there any reason why Tiny Adventures (and other digital versions of D&D) couldn't be made on-topic for DDI General??
I am thinking that it might be a nice fit there.
There's potential reasons, I would imagine. For example, how do the "powers that be" feel about having tools such as PC Gen and Dunjinni discussed in the D&Di section? That's probably the biggest consideration -- does WotC want these third-party products discussed in the forum for their flagship digital D&D tools?
DDI should only include the actual tools that subscribers can get and use. Nothing else.
That is where the Digital D&D forum idea came form for other digital things regarding D&D.
Eldritch_Lord's DM toolkit, Tiny Adventurers, off-site reviews, fansite listings, other websites devoted to D&D, etc.
It would be the melting pot for things found around the web that is for D&D in the digital age.
There's potential reasons, I would imagine. For example, how do the "powers that be" feel about having tools such as PC Gen and Dunjinni discussed in the D&Di section? That's probably the biggest consideration -- does WotC want these third-party products discussed in the forum for their flagship digital D&D tools?
When I first started as VCL for the forum, I asked G0 if it was alright to have, in an FAQ, links to 3rd-party VTTs. He said most definitely. This reminds me that I should contact Solice to get her to find out if this is still the case.
That is where the Digital D&D forum idea came form for other digital things regarding D&D.
No, it's not at all where the idea came from. The forum existed long before D&Di was a gleam in Randy Buehler's eye; but for whatever reason, it was removed during the last re-org.
- Condensing the DDI forums is smart- there is way too little traffic to either magazine-specific forum.
- Labeling the various 4e forums as 4e forums is also wise- it will help people post in the right place.
- The "Gamer Classifieds" link should be made very visible- I find myself posting it in answer to people's questions incredibly often. The classifieds section is a great tool, and it increases in value the more people see and use it.
- Giving some of the settings their own space in a way that doesn't clutter things is really smart. IMO some of them will have about 4 active threads at most, but that's fine as long as the presentation of things is simple.
I'd also like to point out that the Character Building: Hybrid section seems to have a lot in common with House Rules. In fact, many boards have at least a few House Rule threads. Some sort of clarification/clean-up might be a good idea here (or maybe not- I can't tell if the intention is to actually have many boards for categorized house rules).
Since the main House Rules board tends to have a lot of short threads, it might be another welcome candidate for sub-forums. This actually could save a bit of space; if most of the discussion in a given forum is really house rules, that forum could be merged.
Something like...
House Rules
...General Rules and Systems
...New Classes
...Paragon Paths & Epic Destinies
...Items
...Monsters and Races
...Powers, Feats, and Rituals
Separating the FR boards a bit more also sounds smart. If/when people get over the 4e changes, it may be confusing and impractical to have threads from before and after the time jump mixed together. And frankly a split would increase the chance that people would engage in constructive conversations, rather than feeling obliged to fight for the "better" version of FR.
Anyway, thanks to everyone contributing good ideas here!
- The "Gamer Classifieds" link should be made very visible- I find myself posting it in answer to people's questions incredibly often. The classifieds section is a great tool, and it increases in value the more people see and use it.
I agree with you in theory, but...
Back on the "old" forums, I pushed hard to make the Classifieds and Marketplace both become more visible. Links to both of those areas were placed right in the description of D&D General. And yet, there were still plenty of threads from people asking where to go to find new game groups.
Did it help having the link so visible? Probably. But it certainly won't help everybody make their Spot checks (or, if you prefer 4e, their passive Perception checks ;) ).
No, it's not at all where the idea came from. The forum existed long before D&Di was a gleam in Randy Buehler's eye; but for whatever reason, it was removed during the last re-org.
What a silly thing to do. Maybe Randy needs to wash his eyes. That gleam could be glaucoma.I just first heard it from a thread GZ was in....
- D&D Headquarters
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Future Releases
- GSL
- Community Business
- 4e D&D Fundamentals
- Defenders
- Strikers
- Leaders
- Controllers
- Hybrids
- Defenders
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- Monsters
- Equipment and Magic Items
- Rules Q&A
- General Discussion
[*]D&D Previous Editions[LIST]
[*]Monsters and Races
[*]Classes and Class Features
[*]Equipment, Skills, and Feats
[*]Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
[*]Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
[*]Previous Editions General[/LIST]
[*]D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
- Gamer Classifieds
[*]D&D Worlds
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Running the Realms
- Eberron
- Other Published Worlds
[*]D&D Insider
- D&Di Announcements
- Article Discussion
- Technical Discussion
- D&Di General
[*]RPGs
- RPGs General Discussion
- d20 General
- d20 Modern
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
[*]Related Topics
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
[/LIST]
Major changes include: Turning Character Building into subforums, moving Previous Editions right under 4E, Reducing the size of the DDi forums by eliminating article specific Generals and merging the Discussions, And finally Splitting the d20 Modern Forum from the d20 General forum.
D&D Headquarters
.....Community Business
.....WotC Staff Blogs
.....Future Releases
.....Product Reviews ([thread=1060447]Discussion about this potential new forum[/thread])
.....Related Topics
.....GSL
4e D&D Fundamentals
.....Classes
.....Paragon and Epic Paths
.....Races and Monsters
.....Character Optimization
.....Character Development
.....Rituals, Equipment, and Magic Items
.....4e General Discussion
D&D Community
.....What's a DM to Do?
.....What's a Player to Do?
.....House Rules
.....Campaign & Adventure Workshop
.....Astrid's Parlor
.....Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
.....D&Di Announcements
.....Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion
.....Technical Discussion
.....Digital D&D
.....D&Di General
D&D Worlds
.....Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
.....Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
.....Eberron: Eberron Lore
.....Eberron: Running Eberron
.....Other Published Worlds
..........Birthright
..........Council of Wyrms
..........Darksun
..........Dragonlance
..........Greyhawk
..........Mystara
..........Planescape
..........Ravenloft
..........Spelljammer
..........Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
D&D Previous Editions
.....Monsters and Races
.....Classes and Class Features
.....Equipment, Skills, and Feats
.....Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
.....Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
.....Previous Editions General
RPGs
.....RPGs General Discussion
.....d20 Modern
.....d20 General
.....d20 Character Optimization
.....d20 Character Development
Related Topics
.....D&D Fiction
.....Play by Post Forums
.....[forum=347]RPG Gamer Classifieds[/forum]
.....[forum=369]The Marketplace[/forum]
.....[forum=518]Star Wars RPG[/forum]
.....[forum=837]Gaming Culture[/forum]
.....[forum=904]Creative Corner[/forum]
I really like this idea of a "Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies" specific board. Has more books are released there will be more and more questions related to these specific subjects (I think).
I read Stickies (or Stickys if you prefer). I believe there may be value in having a Sticky for the various Class Boards that explain what that class is about; for example in the Defender board you could have a brief description of how the Defender is the guy that protects the squishy (you get the idea). It may solve some of the problems new folks have on where to ask questions.
Thank you.
Also, Eberron doesn't need to be split until the 4th edition campaign setting is released. As it stands, it barely gets enough traffic to avoid getting merged into Other Worlds!
Any thoughts on my idea of an expanded House Rules board?
I think it's a novel idea, but I think it's not presently needed. Maybe if the House Rules board becomes really overwhelming, that would be a good way to subdivide it.
I think splitting it from old to new would help the situation. At best, it will give each faction of the fan base a place to discuss their preferred edition, at worst, it puts a spotlight on the trolls and makes it easier for us to clean it up.
People have made it clear that they intend to show their discontent regardless of what everyone else wants. I think, with the sections separated, we'd have a defined place to post and share the edition we enjoy. Then, if trolling or the like continues, it will be much easier to report their behavior as being out of line.
Using Zherog's list and mudbunny's editing format (and adding green to represent forums that are moved, but not otherwise changed), and my own mad [noparse][list][/noparse] skillz, here's my proposal:
- D&D Headquarters
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Product Reviews and Discussion
- Future Releases
- GSL
- D&D Fundamentals
Character Building: DefendersCharacter Building: StrikersCharacter Building: LeadersCharacter Building: ControllersCharacter Building: HybridsBase Classes- Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- Races and Monsters
- Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
- Abilities, Skills and Feats
- Rules Q&A
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- General Discussion
- D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
- D&D Insider
- D&Di Announcements
- Dragon General
Dragon Article Discussion- Dungeon General
Dungeon Adventures DiscussionTechnical Discussion- D&Di General
- D&D Worlds
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: Previous Editions
- Eberron
- Other Published Worldsfn
- Birthright
- Council of Wyrms
- Darksun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Third-Party Published Worlds
- D&D Previous Editions
- Monsters and Races
- Classes and Class Features
- Equipment, Skills, and Feats
- Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
- Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
- Previous Editions General
- RPGs
- RPGs General Discussion
- d20 Modern and General
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
- Related Topics
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
fnI know I said I'm normally against subforums, and I still am. I'm willing to make an exception for the Other Worlds. The community there really wants it and I think it's worth making an exception to allow some infrequently trafficked forums. Also, I don't know if this is possible, but could we arranege it so the general "Other Published Worlds" forum also lists all of the posts located in its associated subforums? That way you can go to Other Worlds to see all posts about other worlds, but you can also go to the subforum if you only care about one of those Other Worlds? That might also be a way to increase traffic in all those forums.
This is huge. As one of the most vocal proponents of separating the Other Worlds forums, the mere fact that this was proposed is heartening. It might take a little time for word to filter out, but I do believe that this would go a long way toward bringing people back who left because of the forum merger.
I don't know if there's a way to do it with the existing software, but the kind of sort feature that you're describing is used on the EnWorld boards and it's pretty cool. I think that would be a satisfactory compromise: the default view would be all worlds together, but with a click, you could separate out the world of your choice. If that's not possible, though, then I would definitely be in favor of separate subforums for each world.
I really think a 4e FR and a previous editions FR is in order. I'll quote my post in another thread in just a moment...
I don't think splitting the Forum along edition lines is the answer. I think it should be FR: Realmslore and FR: Previous Editions, directing people who don't want anything to do with the new Realms to the Previous Editions forum. I think talking about the history of the Realms and the old lore has a perfectly legitimate place in Realmslore. Its the hostility and negativity that needs to go.
Also, I don't know if this is possible, but could we arranege it so the general "Other Published Worlds" forum also lists all of the posts located in its associated subforums?
Yes, I'm pretty sure that's possible.
For some reason, when I first read wrecan's suggestion, I had something else in mind. Yes, I agree this would be a very nice resolution.
I don't think splitting the Forum along edition lines is the answer. I think it should be FR: Realmslore and FR: Previous Editions, directing people who don't want anything to do with the new Realms to the Previous Editions forum. I think talking about the history of the Realms and the old lore has a perfectly legitimate place in Realmslore. Its the hostility and negativity that needs to go.
Which, sadly, isn't going to go away unless we separate them. Just because it's for 4e FR, doesn't mean we can't talk about Realmslore. All it does is make trolling, bashing and the like standout as off-topic, wrong and against the coc.
Drastic, yes a bit. Needed, I think so.
This is huge. As one of the most vocal proponents of separating the Other Worlds forums, the mere fact that this was proposed is heartening
And you thought I wasn't listening!
Which, sadly, isn't going to go away unless we separate them. Just because it's for 4e FR, doesn't mean we can't talk about Realmslore. All it does is make trolling, bashing and the like standout as off-topic, wrong and against the coc.
Drastic, yes a bit. Needed, I think so.
If it comes to that, it'll be a sad day. Still, having the main FR forum being hostile to the current edition and new players is unacceptable from a business(WotCs viewpoint, and these are the WotC forums) and a community standpoint.
I just don't think the community can be split without breaking the community. Its kind of a lose-lose situation unless somebody steps in with some sort of leadership there.
If it comes to that, it'll be a sad day. Still, having the main FR forum being hostile to the current edition and new players is unacceptable from a business(WotCs viewpoint, and these are the WotC forums) and a community standpoint.
I just don't think the community can be split without breaking the community. Its kind of a lose-lose situation unless somebody steps in with some sort of leadership there.
I agree, but then we step on LK's toes... then we get more people upset and things get worse.
At this point, I really don't see anything else working. 2 Realmslore sections, one for 4e FR (which includes everything) and one in the Previous editions for pre-spellplague only.
It won't change for the better until people realize what they are doing is wrong, either in the wrong place or by breaking the coc for baiting, trolling and the like. As it is, they have free reign to do as they please and it is ruining the forums for people who enjoy 4e FR.
I think it's a novel idea, but I think it's not presently needed. Maybe if the House Rules board becomes really overwhelming, that would be a good way to subdivide it.
Well, very little of what happens on the internet is needed
A lot of the other changes are either just smart book-keeping (consolidation) or giving a few vocal groups what they want. House rules now span at least 4 forums (Equipment & Magic Items, CB: Hybrid, Monsters, and House Rules), so this idea is on about the same level as some of these other changes.
But if we are ranking things in importance, changes that facilitate better discussions on GD and FR are the most needed. IMO some kind of 3e FR board is a really good idea. The current setup is going to lead people to assume that either (1) you're only supposed to talk about 4e FR or (2) you can fight about which timeline is "better" and win the forum. Both options look pretty bad. As for GD, labeling things as 4e-specific is smart, but better moderation is the real key (and off-topic).
Using Zherog's list and mudbunny's editing format (and adding green to represent forums that are moved, but not otherwise changed), and my own mad [noparse][list][/noparse] skillz, here's my proposal:
- D&D Headquarters
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Product Reviews and Discussion
- Future Releases
- GSL
- D&D Fundamentals
Character Building: DefendersCharacter Building: StrikersCharacter Building: LeadersCharacter Building: ControllersCharacter Building: HybridsBase Classes- Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- Races and Monsters
- Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
- Abilities, Skills and Feats
- Rules Q&A
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- General Discussion
- D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
- D&D Insider
- D&Di Announcements
- Dragon General
Dragon Article Discussion- Dungeon General
Dungeon Adventures DiscussionTechnical Discussion- D&Di General
- D&D Worlds
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: Previous Editions
- Eberron
- Other Published Worldsfn
- Birthright
- Council of Wyrms
- Darksun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Third-Party Published Worlds
- D&D Previous Editions
- Monsters and Races
- Classes and Class Features
- Equipment, Skills, and Feats
- Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
- Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
- Previous Editions General
- RPGs
- RPGs General Discussion
- d20 Modern and General
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
- Related Topics
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
fnI know I said I'm normally against subforums, and I still am. I'm willing to make an exception for the Other Worlds. The community there really wants it and I think it's worth making an exception to allow some infrequently trafficked forums. Also, I don't know if this is possible, but could we arranege it so the general "Other Published Worlds" forum also lists all of the posts located in its associated subforums? That way you can go to Other Worlds to see all posts about other worlds, but you can also go to the subforum if you only care about one of those Other Worlds? That might also be a way to increase traffic in all those forums.
This is how it should have been from the start.
Also, Eberron doesn't need to be split until the 4th edition campaign setting is released. As it stands, it barely gets enough traffic to avoid getting merged into Other Worlds!
I split it for two reasons.
1) It helps to make that community a bit happier.
2) I'm preemptively splitting now rather than next Spring.
Basically, there's no harm to having two forums, so then (in my opinion) the question becomes "are there benefits?" I think there could be in this case.
Maybe even Hellcat will post in the new forum with whatever come about and make it easier to find the new things coming....
Why am I even talking about this, I don't like Eberron! 
-A 'edition split' is in no way making the most use of the extra space granted by getting a new board. 90% of the existing material is 1e-2e-3e, so 90% of the posts will be there, while only 10% of the posts will be in a 4e section. That's a waste of an opportunity for section space that I had to 'argue' (not really arguing, but a few detailed back and forth PMs) with G0 about.
-So, in short, as long as I am around, I am not going to let this opportunity be misused.
I agree, but then we step on LK's toes... then we get more people upset and things get worse.
-And people get their knees broken...
-That said, I have a whole 'report' that basically sums things up, but I don't think anyone wants to read it.
-Concerning adding a new Forgotten Realms section...The only viable addition is a 'Forgotten Realms General' board. There are many threads that get started that don't deal with either Realmslore or campaigns, such as book reviews, for example, that I simply include in Realmslore, or Running the Realms, based on the intended topic of the post (ie, is it more lore oriented or D&D mechanics oriented), simply because there is no other place to put them.
-A 'edition split' is in no way making the most use of the extra space granted by getting a new board. 90% of the existing material is 1e-2e-3e, so 90% of the posts will be there, while only 10% of the posts will be in a 4e section. That's a waste of an opportunity for section space that I had to 'argue' (not really arguing, but a few detailed back and forth PMs) with G0 about.
-So, in short, as long as I am around, I am not going to let this opportunity be misused.
-And people get their knees broken...
-That said, I have a whole 'report' that basically sums things up, but I don't think anyone wants to read it.
So you don't feel adding a place for 4e FR and a place for previous editions will help stem the tide of spamming, trolling, hating and hijacking pro threads? If so, I have to disagree.
I've seen at least 5 posters state they wont talk about 4e FR due to the negativity there. Some lose their cool because of it and a few even want to make a forum away from here.
Something needs to change, what do you propose?
*edit, I'd read the report....
-Concerning adding a new Forgotten Realms section...The only viable addition is a 'Forgotten Realms General' board. There are many threads that get started that don't deal with either Realmslore or campaigns, such as book reviews, for example, that I simply include in Realmslore, or Running the Realms, based on the intended topic of the post (ie, is it more lore oriented or D&D mechanics oriented), simply because there is no other place to put them.
-A 'edition split' is in no way making the most use of the extra space granted by getting a new board. 90% of the existing material is 1e-2e-3e, so 90% of the posts will be there, while only 10% of the posts will be in a 4e section. That's a waste of an opportunity for section space that I had to 'argue' (not really arguing, but a few detailed back and forth PMs) with G0 about.
-So, in short, as long as I am around, I am not going to let this opportunity be misused.
-And people get their knees broken...
-That said, I have a whole 'report' that basically sums things up, but I don't think anyone wants to read it.
I agree with you that making splitting the editions isn't the best thing for the FR community. I'm opposed to splitting the two for the most part. The reasoning for splitting them in this way isn't because its for the good of the community, but that the negativity currently found on Realmslore needs to be stopped by any means necessary. Having forums hostile to the current edition of the game that forum is devoted to and new players of that edition isn't really a viable option.
The FR community was split when the changes were made to it. Might as well just make a place where the sides can exist separately if they cannot coexist.
Exactly.
- Other Published Worldsfn
- Birthright
- Council of Wyrms
- Darksun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Third-Party Published Worlds
fnI know I said I'm normally against subforums, and I still am. I'm willing to make an exception for the Other Worlds. The community there really wants it and I think it's worth making an exception to allow some infrequently trafficked forums. Also, I don't know if this is possible, but could we arranege it so the general "Other Published Worlds" forum also lists all of the posts located in its associated subforums? That way you can go to Other Worlds to see all posts about other worlds, but you can also go to the subforum if you only care about one of those Other Worlds? That might also be a way to increase traffic in all those forums.
While I think this is good idea, I wonder if it is too late to unring the bell. The mystara community has created it's own board and has tried to encourage the other settings to come over. Dragonlance community has left to it's own board. Dark Sun seems to still have some activity.
Wizards seems undecided what to do with the forums and not particularly capable of maintaining it's stability. Even a simple decision as to the name of the "What's a DM to do?" forum flops back and forth. I sometimes wonder if wizards will eventually lock the forum behind the D&D insider subscription. They simply don't inspire me with confidence.
D&D Headquarters
.....Community Business
.....WotC Staff Blogs
.....Future Releases
.....GSL
4e D&D Fundamentals
.....[forum=347]FIND PLAYERS IN YOUR AREA (Click Here)[/forum]
.....4e Classes
.....4e Paragon and Epic Paths * Provisional see below
.....4e Powers, Skills and Feats
.....4e Races and Monsters
.....4e Character and Party Optimization
.....4e Character Development
.....4e Rituals, Equipment, and Magic Items
.....4e General Discussion
D&D Community
.....What's a DM to Do?
.....What's a Player to Do?
.....House Rules
.....Campaign & Adventure Workshop
.....Astrid's Parlor
.....Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
.....D&Di Announcements
.....Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion
.....Technical Discussion
.....Digital D&D
.....D&Di General
D&D Worlds
.....Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
.....Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
.....Eberron: Eberron Lore
.....Eberron: Running Eberron
.....Other Published Worlds * see below
D&D Previous Editions
.....Monsters and Races
.....Classes and Class Features
.....Equipment, Skills, and Feats
.....Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
.....Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters * See below
..........Birthright
..........Council of Wyrms
..........Darksun
..........Dragonlance
..........Greyhawk
..........Mystara
..........Planescape
..........Ravenloft
..........Spelljammer
.....Previous Editions General
RPGs
.....RPGs General Discussion
.....d20 Modern
.....d20 General
.....d20 Character Optimization
.....d20 Character Development
.....Product Reviews ([thread=1060447]Discussion about this potential new forum[/thread])* Provisional- see below
Related Topics
.....D&D Fiction
.....Play by Post Forums
.....[forum=347]RPG Gamer Classifieds[/forum]
.....[forum=369]The Marketplace[/forum]
.....[forum=518]Star Wars RPG[/forum]
.....[forum=837]Gaming Culture[/forum]
.....[forum=904]Creative Corner[/forum]
Okay, a few structural changes.
We want the place to be newbie friendly. It should be clear what goes where. Having a Races/Classes board is less confusing than the various roles boards. Which forum do discussions on wizards go? If you're new, you wouldn't know which role or which forum to go to.
Added a big honking link near the top of the list. :D
I don't think paragon and epic paths are big enough just yet for their own forum. I'm sure at some point we'd need it. When 3e first came out we didn't have a prestige class board right off.
For the optimizing board I added Party optimization. 4e focuses much on party building as it does character building. Powers from various characters interact with each other.
The other worlds didn't really get a lot of traffic when we had them. But, folks are asking for them. While they are not currently in print, they should be a sub forum in the previous edition boards. As they become published worlds, we can add two forums in the same style as the FR and Eberron boards. So if Dragonlance is the next world, we can put up a Dragonlance lore and Running Dragonlance boards.
We could even "promote" the other world forum from sub forum to "Lore" status as the worlds become 4e. (Assuming they do. This may not be the case.)
The other big issue is product review. As I've said, Mel told me WotC doesn't want one. Even if that position has changed, such a forum for us here would be nothing but a headache for the community. Pro reviews would be seen as shilling for WotC since it's the WotC boards. Negative reviews would be seen as trolling/slamming WotC. Independant reviews would be better for independant sites such as EN World and Brilliantgameologists.com.
We used to have a link to EN World, and I'm sure I could get permission to link their review area again.
If it is decided to be hosted here, it has to be in the general RPG area rather than D&D. That would allow reviews of other products. (But since Gleemax isn't around, the focus of these boards should be WotC's current edition of D&D.)
I don't think paragon and epic paths are big enough just yet for their own forum.
It should really be "Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies". I count about six to eight active threads in the past 24 hours that would fit there. Thats low, but I think it would expand.
So you don't feel adding a place for 4e FR and a place for previous editions will help stem the tide of spamming, trolling, hating and hijacking pro threads?
I've seen at least 5 posters state they wont talk about 4e FR due to the negativity there. Some lose their cool because of it and a few even want to make a forum away from here.
Something needs to change, what do you propose?
*edit, I'd read the report....
-Firstly, there is hardly an 'epidemic', as 90% of threads that exist go on without a hitch. I've kept my quiet thus, far, staying out of the "LK Sucks" thread, but being as that it's relevant here, I have to share.
-That said, specific people need to stop doing specific things, which is what my report is, and the 'problem' will go away. I keep tabs on everyone who posts somewhat regularly, noting their their posting habits, how often they contribute, how meaningful their contributions are, and so on.
-Splitting the boards has nothing do with with the overblown 'problem', and needs to be done for administrative reasons, and not 'fighting' reasons, for the reasons I outlined above.
It should be specified that the forums are for 4e... especially if we don't split the FR forums.
-The Forgotten Realms sections are edition neutral, as are all of the D&D Settings sections.
-Firstly, there is hardly an 'epidemic', as 90% of threads that exist go on without a hitch. I've kept my quiet thus, far, staying out of the "LK Sucks" thread, but being as that it's relevant here, I have to share.
-That said, specific people need to stop doing specific things, which is what my report is, and the 'problem' will go away. I keep tabs on everyone who posts somewhat regularly, noting their their posting habits, how often they contribute, how meaningful their contributions are, and so on.
-Splitting the boards has nothing do with with the overblown 'problem', and needs to be done for administrative reasons, and not 'fighting' reasons, for the reasons I outlined above.
-The Forgotten Realms sections are edition neutral. Currently, and as long as I have any amount of say in things.
I wasn't aware there was an LK sucks thread. If you mean the 'SitRep in the FR' thread... you should look in there. A lot of people (myself included) have said you do a fine job as forum Lead.
The problem is, you aren't Superman and there is a problem. When people feel like they can't post in a section they would like to because of the fear of being slammed, spammed, trolled or harassed (perceived or not) there is a problem.
Still, what do you think should be done to improve the situation for pro 4e FR fans?
(But since Gleemax isn't around, the focus of these boards should be WotC's current edition of D&D.)
He said the forums are for the current edition, not I.
Still, what do you think should be done to improve the situation for pro 4e FR fans?
-As I said, certain people need to stop doing certain things. Which is something only they can do, not us, not any amount of complaining, yelling, shouting, and so on. Splitting the Forgotten Realms section is in no way tied to any of that.
-As I said, certain people need to stop doing certain things. Which is something only they can do, not us, not any amount of complaining, yelling, shouting, and so on. Splitting the Forgotten Realms section is in no way tied to any of that.
That doesn't really solve anything.
That doesn't really solve anything.
No, it doesn't. Hoping people will change, yet doing nothing to prompt them, solves nothing.
No, it doesn't. Hoping people will change, yet doing nothing to prompt them, solves nothing.
-Did I prompt you to change your posting habits? Yes, yes I did. And, you complied. Have other who I asked to change their posting habits complied? Yes, yes they did. Will everyone who I ask to change their posting habits comply? No.
-Will making a 1e-2e-3e-3.5e section and a 4e section change people's posting habits? Well, it sure doesn't seem to work in the General Discussion D&D section, based on the horror stories I hear. Hence why the Forgotten Realms section undergoing mitosis should in no way be effected by the bickering of the same five or six people (and, mind you, the few back-and-forths that occur on an unrelated issue such as 'Edition Wars' are mostly the same four or six people), and again, be for administrative purposes, to handle the increased traffic in non-specific threads.
-That's my informed, educated, black-and-white four cents, though, and that's that, I'm done here.
Note there is only two GD's and throwing 3rd into the other previous editions was not a very smart thing for people to do as it was like throwing a chicken into the foxhouse.
But 3rd Edition is, now that 4E has been released, a Previous Edition. Where else should it have gone?
-Did I prompt you to change your posting habits? Yes, yes I did. And, you complied. Have other who I asked to change their posting habits complied? Yes, yes they did. Will everyone who I ask to change their posting habits comply? No.
-Will making a 1e-2e-3e-3.5e section and a 4e section change people's posting habits? Well, it sure doesn't seem to work in the General Discussion D&D section, based on the horror stories I hear. Hence why the Forgotten Realms section undergoing mitosis should in no way be effected by the bickering of the same five or six people (and, mind you, the few back-and-forths that occur on an unrelated issue such as 'Edition Wars' are mostly the same four or six people), and again, be for administrative purposes, to handle the increased traffic in non-specific threads.
-That's my informed, educated, black-and-white four cents, though, and that's that, I'm done here.
It only takes five or six people to ruin a forum. 4E General Discussion is widely considered a cesspool and troll trap, and its mostly because of five or six people causing trouble. The thing an edition split does accomplish is to set topic guidelines with the implied suggestion that if you don't like the 4E Forgotten Realms(for example) you should go post in the FR Previous Editions Forum. Granted, not everyone will cooperate with that, but the ones that don't become easily identified as trolls.
I'm not necessarily advocating this. FR Lore is as much about history as anything else, and history necessarily includes all editions. I'm just of the opinion that the current state of the forum where new posters and fans of the 4E Realms feel too intimidated to post there is unacceptable and needs to change one way or another.
-Did I prompt you to change your posting habits? Yes, yes I did. And, you complied. Have other who I asked to change their posting habits complied? Yes, yes they did. Will everyone who I ask to change their posting habits comply? No.
-Will making a 1e-2e-3e-3.5e section and a 4e section change people's posting habits? Well, it sure doesn't seem to work in the General Discussion D&D section, based on the horror stories I hear. Hence why the Forgotten Realms section undergoing mitosis should in no way be effected by the bickering of the same five or six people (and, mind you, the few back-and-forths that occur on an unrelated issue such as 'Edition Wars' are mostly the same four or six people), and again, be for administrative purposes, to handle the increased traffic in non-specific threads.
-That's my informed, educated, black-and-white four cents, though, and that's that, I'm done here.
I've said you are doing a fine job, but, like you just said, not everyone will listen to you. It's those people who need a stern hand on their backside. We can't keep it going like it is.
I'm glad you're taking the time to come on here, what we need, though, is ideas on fixing what is still wrong and staying that way regardless of what is already being done.
If you don't feel splitting the editions is needed, fine by me, I didn't suggest it, only support it as a possible solution to our problem. What else can be done to make it a better place?
But 3rd Edition is, now that 4E has been released, a Previous Edition. Where else should it have gone?
I'm going to go out on a limb here and speak for Hellmute for a second. Hellmute, feel free to contradict, clarify, or shout down anything I say here:
Hellmute has said that he doesn't care for either 3E or 4E D&D. That being said, he likes to talk about D&D on forums. Talking about D&D on forums works best when there is a bigger community with more posters. The community for D&D editions prior to 3E isn't very big, and doesn't suit Hellmute's needs. What he wants is to talk about D&D and have the editions he prefers represented on heavily trafficked forums. On a side note, previous editions General Discussion being saddled with 3E makes 3E dominate the discussion there, drowning out talk of editions prior to 3E. IMO, making a General Discussion for all editions would be even worse, but there would be more variety(and screaming) as there is enough going on with 3E that the forum wouldn't be all 4E all the time.
I think with a forum title such as "realms lore", it would cover all the non-crunch lore of the world which includes all the editions. Do we want "running the realms" to be 4e?
That would work... or a 4e FR General... Running the Realms, in and of itself, could be for 3.x, 4e, 2e, etc...
I'm going to go out on a limb here and speak for Hellmute for a second. Hellmute, feel free to contradict, clarify, or shout down anything I say here:
Hellmute has said that he doesn't care for either 3E or 4E D&D. That being said, he likes to talk about D&D on forums. Talking about D&D on forums works best when there is a bigger community with more posters. The community for D&D editions prior to 3E isn't very big, and doesn't suit Hellmute's needs. What he wants is to talk about D&D and have the editions he prefers represented on heavily trafficked forums. On a side note, previous editions General Discussion being saddled with 3E makes 3E dominate the discussion there, drowning out talk of editions prior to 3E. IMO, making a General Discussion for all editions would be even worse, but there would be more variety(and screaming) as there is enough going on with 3E that the forum wouldn't be all 4E all the time.
Well more ot the point of a place to discuss D&D, edition be damned.
Here is Bob the fighter and his exploits. I got some inspiration for such-and-such form here.
Things that ARE D&D centric, so do not belong in an off-topic forum as off-topic mean NOT related to D&D, but don't mater what edition you are playing, just that it is D&D rather than some random RPG GD. Because frankly you could take all the other RPGs out there and stick them where the sun don't shine for all I care. I don't want to discuss them, nor hear about them. If I did, I would not be on a D&D forum....
Does EVERY discussion HAVE to revolve around a specific edition?
Is there really nothing that is central to D&D anymore?
If not, then there is no D&D, and 4th, 5th, etc will just end up being random fantasy RPG of the day....
I like talking about D&D. Save 3rd I will talk about any of them. Why can a place not exist where you can just discuss D&D without caring what editoin exactly you are talking about?
Does everyone have that much hate for an edition that they must know what edition someone is speaking of so in the oft chance it is the one they dislike they can attack the edition or the poster?
Well more ot the point of a place to discuss D&D, edition be damned.
Here is Bob the fighter and his exploits. I got some inspiration for such-and-such form here.
Things that ARE D&D centric, so do not belong in an off-topic forum as off-topic mean NOT related to D&D, but don't mater what edition you are playing, just that it is D&D rather than some random RPG GD. Because frankly you could take all the other RPGs out there and stick them where the sun don't shine for all I care. I don't want to discuss them, nor hear about them. If I did, I would not be on a D&D forum....
Does EVERY discussion HAVE to revolve around a specific edition?
Is there really nothing that is central to D&D anymore?
If not, then there is no D&D, and 4th, 5th, etc will just end up being random fantasy RPG of the day....
I like talking about D&D. Save 3rd I will talk about any of them. Why can a place not exist where you can just discuss D&D without caring what editoin exactly you are talking about?
Does everyone have that much hate for an edition that they must know what edition someone is speaking of so in the oft chance it is the one they dislike they can attack the edition or the poster?
What were things like on the forums before the announcement of 4E? Prior to the announcement of 4E there was no edition war. I don't really remember ever reading anything that didn't have to do with 3E during my time there.
What were things like on the forums before the announcement of 4E? Prior to the announcement of 4E there was no edition war. I don't really remember ever reading anything that didn't have to do with 3E during my time there.
4th edition announced GenCon Aug 2007
hellmute Join Date: Mar 2008
4th edition announced GenCon Aug 2007
hellmute Join Date: Mar 2008
heh, well, to answer the question, it was 3.x exclusive.
4th edition announced GenCon Aug 2007
hellmute Join Date: Mar 2008
That question was as much for people who posted regularly back then as it was for you.
As I remember it, there was zero talk about previous editions and little edition neutral discussion on the main D&D forums prior to the announcement of 4E. And that was in the absence of the messy divorce going on right now.
Here is Bob the fighter and his exploits. I got some inspiration for such-and-such form here.
Sounds like a good candiate for the Character Development board. That's about fluff, not crunch.
No, not everything has to be edition specific. If it's generic enough, it can fit in some of the 4e boards.
Sounds like a good candiate for the Character Development board. That's about fluff, not crunch.
Bob is not being developed. Bob is what he is. He doesn't need some psychiatric help to finish him out. He is fully developed.
Bob is not being developed. Bob is what he is. He doesn't need some psychiatric help to finish him out. He is fully developed.
Then post him there so other people can see his history. You don't have to ask people to help develop him, but others can benefit and maybe get ideas for their own characters.
Unless you're suggesting a character repository? That might be neat.
Just a place to post your characters. It was something Gleemax wanted to do, but we know how that ended.
D&D Community
.....What's a DM to Do?
.....What's a Player to Do?
.....House Rules
.....Campaign & Adventure Workshop
.....Astrid's Parlor
.....The Big Book of Characters/NPCs
.....Off-Topic Tavern
The Big Book of Characters/NPCs is a place to post any edition character/NPC you've created.
Post completed characters only, please. Use the Character Optimization/Character Development boards to flesh out your characters.
What were things like on the forums before the announcement of 4E? Prior to the announcement of 4E there was no edition war. I don't really remember ever reading anything that didn't have to do with 3E during my time there.
The forums were 3e/3.5 and the 2e guys were courteous and stayed in the OoP forums with only the occasionally drop in coming around periodically to tell us how stupid we were for not playing 2e.
Separation by role is logical and requires no alteration for future classes. If all of them are merged in a single forum it would be way too much traffic so it probably can't happen anyway.
- Prominent Link to the Gamer Classifieds: Good Idea
- More clearly denoting "4E" or "Older editions" on each forum: Good Idea
- Forums for older settings like Mystara, Dragonance, Greyhawk, etc.: Good Idea
But hey, I'm not exactly in an impartial situation on this specific issue.
- Merging the character building forums: Bad Idea.
Separation by role is logical and requires no alteration for future classes. If all of them are merged in a single forum it would be way too much traffic so it probably can't happen anyway.
It might be good to point out that this merge would involve less of a strain on the combined forum if all the misplaced house rules (ahem) had a better home.
Some excerpts from a thread in the CB: Hybrid forum "Why so many houserules here?"
House Rules is at the bottom, out of the way, and nobody ever sees it. Plus, House Rules seems like changing the rules, not homebrewing classes and races. Also, the old Races/Classes boards were the place to put your new thing and that's kinda stuck.
This is the first real 'catch-all' forum in the list and most of the house-rules discussed here are, at least, directly related to the topics of the forum.
The House Rule forum isn't even in the same hierarchy - if you stay in the D & D Fundamental boards you'll never see it.
(emphasis mine)
and in reply to the above
Which is a shame. I'd like more people to see and comment on my work in the House Rule's Forum.
This just furthers my belief that character building should be trashed. 95% of it fits better in house rules or character optimization.
Who decided on Character Building? Where are they, and could they explain what they intended it to be?
It seems like at least a few people think moving House Rules would be good. placing it in D&D Fundamentals would be nice, so that people would at least see it when they are looking at the other rules-related things. Also, discouraging and/or moving threads with house rules for monsters, classes, races, and equipment from those forums would make a lot of sense.
In the end, I just don't get why posts in a particular easily-defined category are spread throughout the boards.
One other thought I had while reading this discussion was: you have a place for House Rules, what about a section for Home-Brew Worlds?
http://forums.gleemax.com/forumdisplay.php?f=707
While I think this is good idea, I wonder if it is too late to unring the bell. The mystara community has created it's own board and has tried to encourage the other settings to come over. Dragonlance community has left to it's own board. Dark Sun seems to still have some activity.
It's true that there may be some people who stay away. However, there's no harm in trying, and I do believe that giving each world its own subforum will encourage some people to come back. At this point, I think each world has at least one other board it could go to, but I think people will continue to check out these boards, even if they also frequent others. Sure, some harm has been done, but that's no reason not to do something about the cause of that harm.
D&D Worlds
.....Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
.....Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
.....Eberron: Eberron Lore
.....Eberron: Running Eberron
.....Other Published Worlds * see below
D&D Previous Editions
.....Monsters and Races
.....Classes and Class Features
.....Equipment, Skills, and Feats
.....Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
.....Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters * See below
..........Birthright
..........Council of Wyrms
..........Darksun
..........Dragonlance
..........Greyhawk
..........Mystara
..........Planescape
..........Ravenloft
..........Spelljammer
.....Previous Editions General
[. . .]
The other worlds didn't really get a lot of traffic when we had them. But, folks are asking for them. While they are not currently in print, they should be a sub forum in the previous edition boards. As they become published worlds, we can add two forums in the same style as the FR and Eberron boards. So if Dragonlance is the next world, we can put up a Dragonlance lore and Running Dragonlance boards.
We could even "promote" the other world forum from sub forum to "Lore" status as the worlds become 4e. (Assuming they do. This may not be the case.)
I don't think the other worlds should be placed under "Previous Editions" because a good deal of the discussion that has been going on (both here and on independent boards solely devoted to those settings) has been how to run the setting with the 4E rules, or what a 4E update of the setting should or might look like. That, and it requires moving them when they do get the 4E update, which has the potential to confuse people; I'd prefer to see all of the worlds in the same area of the boards, whether they have official 4E support or not.
I don't think the other worlds should be placed under "Previous Editions" because a good deal of the discussion that has been going on (both here and on independent boards solely devoted to those settings) has been how to run the setting with the 4E rules, or what a 4E update of the setting should or might look like.
Something was bugging me about Webster's proposal in that regard, and I couldn't put my finger on it under Brom put it into words above. I agree.
Using Zherog's list and mudbunny's editing format (and adding green to represent forums that are moved, but not otherwise changed), and my own mad [noparse][list][/noparse] skillz, here's my proposal:
D&D Worlds
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: Previous Editions
- Eberron
- Other Published Worldsfn
- Birthright
- Council of Wyrms
- Darksun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Third-Party Published Worlds
I would love to see something like this.
Havard
Something was bugging me about Webster's proposal in that regard, and I couldn't put my finger on it under Brom put it into words above. I agree.
Plus, that rids you of the trouble of having to move the subforums each time they return to in Print status and back to out of print status again.
Havard
Which is not to say that I intend to come back here - I'm quite comfy over at the Piazza. If Wizards of the Coast wants our communities back, they're going to have to fight for us. I'm guessing that they don't really care, which means we're all happy. :D
Even if we are given our Mystara forum back, I will probably only post over at the Piazza and just lurk here. Many of the negative issues I have with this forum does not happen over there.
The whole Mystara 4E thing is good, but I will not be buying 4E so it really does not pertain to me as a DM or as a consumer.
I definitely support the Other Published Worlds each getting their own sub-forum again. The existing threads will need to be separated out again, though.
Which is not to say that I intend to come back here - I'm quite comfy over at the Piazza. If Wizards of the Coast wants our communities back, they're going to have to fight for us. I'm guessing that they don't really care, which means we're all happy. :D
Just a comment here... Message boards aren't like an exclusive relationship when you're dating. You can frequent more than one message board, and get benefits from each.
Basically, I understand why a large segment of the former "Other Worlds" community is ticked off. But I would hope that if we could correct past mistakes (made by people no longer here) that maybe that could serve as the proverbial olive branch. By all means, if the Piazza is working for you, keep posting there! But that shouldn't preclude you from also[ posting here.
I think with a forum title such as "realms lore", it would cover all the non-crunch lore of the world which includes all the editions. Do we want "running the realms" to be 4e?
While I would agree in a general setting I disagree for Forgotten Realms.
The thing about the Realms is that it tends to be a setting that deals with the lore, history, people and places more so than in most other settings. The current edition of the setting has changed it around a lot by making a 100 year leap into the future. However, there are still a lot of people who do not want to change.
What this has caused is an environment where there are two, mutually exclusive, discussions going. One talking about the previous edition, where there are certain things going on, and one of the newer edition, where there are other things going on. The lore, as it stands, is just too different for the two things to work together.
I also disagree with LK's assessment of the current Realms boards. He has said that he doesn't feel that 5 people not talking on the forums to be a problem, but there are others (like me) who won't talk on the forums there much, but aren't included in that list.
At this point Forgotten Realms is split in two in a way unlike any other setting. Because of this there needs to be a separation just as there is for the rules systems. The lore is too vastly different to leave it in one forum.
Just a comment here... Message boards aren't like an exclusive relationship when you're dating. You can frequent more than one message board, and get benefits from each.
Basically, I understand why a large segment of the former "Other Worlds" community is ticked off. But I would hope that if we could correct past mistakes (made by people no longer here) that maybe that could serve as the proverbial olive branch. By all means, if the Piazza is working for you, keep posting there! But that shouldn't preclude you from also[ posting here.
It's not really a matter of correcting past mistakes. The phrase "the damage has already been done" isn't actually fitting in this case, because if anything the whole thing has turned out to be extremely positive for the community. We now have our own home at the Piazza which has caused a flurry of activity, bringing about a real Renaissance in some of the old worlds. That is the primary reason why it seems unlikely we'll be moving back in here.
You are right that there's no need to be exclusive, but given that the vast majority of the old worlds community is working adults, many with families, probably with an average age of about 30, time is a big issue. Most people just don't have the time to be in two places at once. Besides, it's much easier to keep everything together in one place.
So what I'm saying is that most of us are not "ticked off" - we've simply moved on to greener pastures. Sure I find it sad that this had to happen, but it's past history now - three months and almost 9,000 posts in the past, in fact. :D
If Wizards of the Coast corrects their mistake and restores the old world sub-forums, that would be great, but just restoring the boards will not likely be enough to bring people back. There would have to be a reason to return.
If Wizards of the Coast wants our communities back, they're going to have to fight for us. I'm guessing that they don't really care, which means we're all happy. :D
I think it is great that WotC seem to have realized that they made a mistake in this last merger. I thought our protests were doomed to be futile, but here we are being offered getting it back.
My argument in the past has been, and remains, that even if fans have moved on, it would be in the interest of WotC to have those discussions here rather than at the Piazza or elsewhere. Fans are happy elsewhere, so it would take time and effort to get things back to the way they were, but IMO WotC would be wise to try to achieve this.
Heck, if I was WotC I would have liked to see every D&D and RPG discussion moved here, so that everyone could be exposed to new products etc etc. At the same time, trust has been broken. Restoring the forums now and expecting discussions to resume at the same level as before right away won't be realistic. I would hate to see the forums reopened and then closed again shortly thereafter because of low traffic. Whoever reopens the boards needs to realize that this is going to take time.
I love the Piazza, but I love talking about my favorite worlds (like Mystara) wherever I can, so I will ofcourse support Mystara forums returning here, even if the main body of my daily postings will probably remain at the Piazza.
I think the fact that WotC admits its mistakes on this one is commendable!
Havard
I'm so happy to see a change in focus that seems to be putting the needs of the fans above reducing the workload of the moderators. I think that the earlier changes have upset a lot of fans and that there will be a lot of PR work to be done to get those fan communities back onboard, but this is a very good first step.
I don't think the other worlds should be placed under "Previous Editions" because a good deal of the discussion that has been going on (both here and on independent boards solely devoted to those settings) has been how to run the setting with the 4E rules, or what a 4E update of the setting should or might look like. That, and it requires moving them when they do get the 4E update, which has the potential to confuse people; I'd prefer to see all of the worlds in the same area of the boards, whether they have official 4E support or not.
The plan for D&D is supposedly that we are going to see some (if not all) of these out of print campaign settings return to print as 4e rulebooks. So I think that D&D needs to build up the fanbase before the 4e campaign setting books hit the shelves.
I've recently heard that the 4th edition Dragonlance is definately a "go for launch", so 4th edition fans are going to need a place to discuss how DL and 4e might go together.
What 4th edition fans need is an active community, with a percentage of old school fans who have "book knowledge" of the soon to return campaign settings. I find edition wars boring (so if you can avoid that it will be a good thing) but if you can get grognards to live alongside early adopters you will build/restore communities that form an essential "Web Enhancement" for those products that adds value to each campaign setting.
I think that the Dragonlance fan community has proved beyond any doubt that close ties between game developers and the community provide free marketing that makes DL products (including things like the movie and the CD) move out of the stores.
I wonder if it would be possible for WotC to steal a trick from Paizo's Pathfinder Alpha release and get some preview material online ASAP and give each campaign setting a sticky that links to all the 4e previews for that world. (Uploading a few more of the old TSR PDFs and using them to help educate 3.5 and 4e fans about the history of forthcoming 4e gameworlds could also help build interest in those settings.)
I think the Spellplague plot of FR has scared a lot of old school fans of other campaign settings, but if that sort of thing isn't going to be done to other campaign settings, I think that previews and a public display of continued respect for the old canon would be a very good second step for disarming the people who rant that "WotC eat babies" and get the conversation back onto "How cool could a 4th edition conversion of Spelljammer/Dragonlance/Mystara/Greyhawk/Dark Sun/etc be?".
Now not all of us are going to move over to 4th edition, but I think all fans of out of print campaign settings would all love to see more products for out of print campaign settings. (And I'd say that this sort of forum structure would work best for everyone.)
I don't think the other worlds should be placed under "Previous Editions" because a good deal of the discussion that has been going on (both here and on independent boards solely devoted to those settings) has been how to run the setting with the 4E rules, or what a 4E update of the setting should or might look like. That, and it requires moving them when they do get the 4E update, which has the potential to confuse people; I'd prefer to see all of the worlds in the same area of the boards, whether they have official 4E support or not.
Plus, that rids you of the trouble of having to move the subforums each time they return to in Print status and back to out of print status again.
I think that Dragonlance specifically, has done so well under Margaret Weis Productions that this time around, I wonder about the economic sense of bringing it back to life and then letting the PR die down afterwards. But not all of the out of print campaign settings are going to do as well as Dragonlance, so you do have a point there. This sort of forum structure means that WotC can switch between high-level marketing to low-level marketing without the forum being ripped apart. It could even cope with some worlds being licenced back out to a third party or brought back to WotC (in time for 4.5e or 5e).
I don't think the other worlds should be placed under "Previous Editions" because a good deal of the discussion that has been going on (both here and on independent boards solely devoted to those settings) has been how to run the setting with the 4E rules, or what a 4E update of the setting should or might look like. That, and it requires moving them when they do get the 4E update, which has the potential to confuse people; I'd prefer to see all of the worlds in the same area of the boards, whether they have official 4E support or not.
Just a comment here... Message boards aren't like an exclusive relationship when you're dating. You can frequent more than one message board, and get benefits from each.
Basically, I understand why a large segment of the former "Other Worlds" community is ticked off. But I would hope that if we could correct past mistakes (made by people no longer here) that maybe that could serve as the proverbial olive branch. By all means, if the Piazza is working for you, keep posting there! But that shouldn't preclude you from also[ posting here.
As one of the people who used to post in the Spelljammer forums here (and who now has a post count of over 600 at The Piazza), I have to agree with most of what Thorf has said.
EDIT: I just checked my own profile and I have less than 200 posts over in this forum. I really love SJ and these additional 600 posts could have been made over here (both inside the SJ forum and elsewhere) if things had been a little different.
What you guys are doing is great. You are laying out the groundwork for a community to be rebuilt here. But over at The Piazza there is an environment where people can say they like one campaign setting, without anyone else trashing that setting and saying "my setting is better than your setting".
With 4th edition promising to bring back one setting per year, I've seen a number of small minded people who sadly think that if they trash every other candidate setting that they can make some sort of WotC overlord change the release schedule around and put their setting out first. I can't tell you how much that sort of negativity puts people off of talking about D&D. I've seen the same sort of negative slapdowns said to someone when a conversation about AD&D or 4th edition has been going on. D&D is supposed to be fun, but a minority of fanatical fans have decided to try to impose their view of D&D onto other fans. I come to places like this during my leasure time and just don't have any time to deal with ranting idiots who want to trash someone else's game style.
The great thing about The Piazza is that they have somehow managed to get people to be positive about the things they like, without being negative about the things that they don't like. (And this "my stuff is cool and your stuff is also cool" attitude extends to editions of D&D as well as campaign settings.) Maybe that is because it is still a relatively small community (so hasn't yet attracted too many trolls*), or maybe it is because the initial core of the community was so eager to grow that they wanted to silence any anti-talk that could drive potential newbies away. Or maybe it is because the people that were not driven away by being mostly ignored (by both TSR and WotC) for several years, really love D&D. If someone has lovingly held onto an OD&D boxed set and managed to not wear the thing out, they must have D&D in their blood and soul.
* = Technically, we do have 4 trolls there right now, but they will soon be hill giants.:P ;) (Sorry, that is a Piazza in-joke.
)One of the things that The Piazza does well is its projects section. Basically, if someone has a team that want to do something new for D&D (such as a 3rd edition Mystara conversion...or a 4th edition Mystara conversion) the admin will give them a forum where people can hang out together and organise their work. Over here, you need to worry about the overall needs of a big sprawling forum and logically the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few (at The Piazza it is far easier for fans of a one hit wonder product to get a voice because the forum is pretty much dedicated to minority products). I think the fact that The Piazza forum doesn't need to do what your forum does, means that both forums can have an overlap of fans, but still do their own things.
I'm not quite sure how you can get the talk back onto more positive things over here. But for me edition wars and setting haters have been as bad as the forum reorganisation. I feel that the D&D community needs a giant group hug! :D
I agree with you, that people could post in more than one place. Forums like Canonfire!, Candlekeep, the Dragonlance Forums and Birthright.net have been going strong for years and that didn't stop some level of traffic from happening here. I think you are going to need to work to relight the fire, but I think that you can do it. Sadly "the people who don't work here anymore" have done damage to what is still "our community" and some of us are not going to come running back here. (I can't speak for everyone, I can only speak for myself, but I anticipate the Other Worlds needing a lot of work to get back off of the ground.) This is work that you shouldn't need to be doing. You guys seem to be listening to the fans. If the recent mistakes had never been made, we could alredy be in an exciting phase where 4th edition brings new fans to meet all of the existing campaign setting fans and each 4e preview starts a ton of speculation on what this cool new stuff could do for setting X. (And from another point of view we could be talking about what setting X can do for today's D&D.)
I really feel for you guys, because you have offered the olive branch. The problem is that many of the people you have offered it to have not realised you have offered it because they were so offended by the other guys that they are not reading this.
So what is the way around this? I think that you could take your own advice and go out to those other communities and build bridges over there. Many of the other forums are friendly towards authors and I think they would welcome WotC staff members as much as them.
We already have a few commercial authors with accounts on The Piazza and I would be very happy to see WotC staff come over and chat to us. You don't need to chat to us about 4th edition or the WotC forums - you could chat to us about anything you want to. There are some people at The Piazza who will probably never stop playing OD&D. But we all love D&D and (even though some of us have different visions to other peopel) we all want D&D to do well. "You" are part of "us" - if you fail, then we fail.
I think that The Piazza can work with Gleemax (or the Wizards COMmunity boards...or whatever this place is going to be called), because ultimately we both want to see the same thing. We both want to see D&D (in all of its forms) do well. (And I say this as me - not as some sort of Piazza spokesman.)
There's potential reasons, I would imagine. For example, how do the "powers that be" feel about having tools such as PC Gen and Dunjinni discussed in the D&Di section? That's probably the biggest consideration -- does WotC want these third-party products discussed in the forum for their flagship digital D&D tools?
To come back to this question:
I PMed Solice (You rock!!) about this and was told that currently, the decision is to stay the course. That is, discussion of and reviews of 3pp are allowed on the WotC forums. That may change in the future after discussions with The New Mike (TM), but they are currently allowed.
Would it be worthwhile to rename DDi General to Digital D&D (and have a solid description)?
Let me fire off a question in the DDi General forum and see what the regs in there think of the idea.
Just thinking off the top of my head, here are the topics that might be covered in a Digital D&D forum:
- Virtual Table Tops (Fantasy Battlegroungs, DDI);
- Chargen programs;
- Video Games;
- Mapping programs;
- Video Games;
- Gaming blogs; and
- Others I can't think of.
The potential is there for the forum to be viable and have decent discussion about the topics, but I don't know if there would actually be enough discussion about.
That being sid, the change of the title to Digital Gaming (along with good description) would (might) increase the traffic. However, one thing to worry about is the optics of it:
[indent]DDI is doing so bad, they had to change the title of the forum devoted to it.[/indent]
I just realized I didn't actually answer your question Z...
Just thinking off the top of my head, here are the topics that might be covered in a Digital D&D forum:
- Virtual Table Tops (Fantasy Battlegroungs, DDI);
- Chargen programs;
- Video Games;
- Mapping programs;
- Video Games;
- Gaming blogs; and
- Others I can't think of.
The potential is there for the forum to be viable and have decent discussion about the topics, but I don't know if there would actually be enough discussion about.
That being sid, the change of the title to Digital Gaming (along with good description) would (might) increase the traffic. However, one thing to worry about is the optics of it:
[indent]DDI is doing so bad, they had to change the title of the forum devoted to it.[/indent]
This is a great list. But I never asked what could be discussed there. ;)
This is a great list. But I never asked what could be discussed there. ;)
Ahhh. Well, in my head you asked it.
I am no fan of dividing Character Building Forums by Party role. I also see no need for the "Character Building" prefix on any forums.
Instead I would suggest dividing the Fundamentals section as follows:
- Arcane Classes
- Divine Classes
- Martial Classes
- Skills, Feats and Rituals
- Equipment and Treasure
- Races and Monsters
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- Rules Q&A
- General Discussion
More forums would be added as more power sources get introduced (Primal Classes, Psionic Classes, etc.)
I agree with Vaal about including a link to Previous Editions at the top of the General Discussions (and Rules Q&A) forums.
I actually like this idea.
Also, it should be made -abundantly- clear as to what Edition General Discussion is meant for. With either a Link to stickied in GD to previous edition General, or that Previous Edition General be moved to be exactly right below D&D Fundamentals. (like same section of the board, just G.D 4e is above general for previous es)
That being sid, the change of the title to Digital Gaming (along with good description) would (might) increase the traffic. However, one thing to worry about is the optics of it:
[indent]DDI is doing so bad, they had to change the title of the forum devoted to it.[/indent]
We've had a digital D&D forum in the past. The DDI forum shouldn't be the place to discuss all digital programs, that would be for a Digital D&D forum. But you're right about name confusion.
Perhaps if a Digital D&D forum had a different name such as Other Electronic D&D.
In a neighbouring thread, the possibility was broughht up that a re-organization of the boards, to make it more clear what type of discussion goes where (especially as it relates to the General Discussion fora) might remove a lot of the hostility that is currently found in both the General Discussion forum, as well as the Forgotten Realms fora.
To that end, this thread is for suggestions on how to re-org the forums to accomplish the above goal.
- D&D Worlds
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: Previous Editions
- Eberron
- Other Published Worldsfn
- Birthright
- Council of Wyrms
- Darksun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Third-Party Published Worlds
fnI know I said I'm normally against subforums, and I still am. I'm willing to make an exception for the Other Worlds. The community there really wants it and I think it's worth making an exception to allow some infrequently trafficked forums. Also, I don't know if this is possible, but could we arranege it so the general "Other Published Worlds" forum also lists all of the posts located in its associated subforums? That way you can go to Other Worlds to see all posts about other worlds, but you can also go to the subforum if you only care about one of those Other Worlds? That might also be a way to increase traffic in all those forums.
It wasn't clear from mudbunny's original post, so let me just ask: is this forum reorganization discussion just hypothetical, or is it something that's going to happen? Is Community Management going to be receptive to another reorganization, or will they look at the proposal that ultimately comes out of this and just say "Um, no" to the whole thing?
More specifically, how much should I get my hopes up that wrecan's proposal for separating the other worlds will eventually be put into action?
D&D Headquarters
.....Community Business
.....WotC Staff Blogs
.....Future Releases
.....Product Reviews ([thread=1060447]Discussion about this potential new forum[/thread])
.....Related Topics (links to the section below)
.....GSL
4e D&D Fundamentals
.....Classes
.....Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Paths
.....Races and Monsters
.....Character Optimization
.....Character Development
.....Rituals, Equipment, and Magic Items
.....4e General Discussion
D&D Community
.....What's a DM to Do?
.....What's a Player to Do?
.....House Rules
.....Campaign & Adventure Workshop
.....Astrid's Parlor
.....Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
.....D&Di Announcements
.....Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion
.....Technical Discussion
.....Digital D&D
.....D&Di General
D&D Worlds
.....Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
.....Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
.....Forgotten Realms: General
.....Eberron: Eberron Lore
.....Eberron: Running Eberron
.....Other Published Worlds
..........Birthright
..........Council of Wyrms
..........Darksun
..........Dragonlance
..........Greyhawk
..........Mystara
..........Planescape
..........Ravenloft
..........Spelljammer
..........Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
D&D Previous Editions
.....Monsters and Races
.....Classes and Class Features
.....Equipment, Skills, and Feats
.....Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
.....Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
.....Previous Editions General
RPGs
.....RPGs General Discussion
.....d20 Modern
.....d20 General
.....d20 Character Optimization
.....d20 Character Development
Related Topics
.....D&D Fiction
.....Play by Post Forums
.....[forum=347]RPG Gamer Classifieds[/forum]
.....[forum=369]The Marketplace[/forum]
.....[forum=518]Star Wars RPG[/forum]
.....[forum=837]Gaming Culture[/forum]
.....[forum=904]Creative Corner[/forum]
I've added an FR: General forum, based on feedback from the Forum Lead of the area and the ongoing discussions about that area.
I'm pondering if it would be a good idea to move Future Releases and Product Reviews to a different section. In my mind, it's better to have as many "topic" forums visible on the initial page load as possible.
I just wanted to let you know that I am reading this thread and taking all feedback into consideration.
To clarify a few points:
- As disruptive as another forum reorg maybe, I believe its needed.
- I will post the proposed reorg by Friday for your consideration.
- I cant please everyone, but I can listen to everyone and weigh options.
- You all rock for caring so much about this community and taking the time to help see it grow!
I understand the reasoning behind elimination of the Rules Q&A area, however, it is very heavily posted in as is our general forums.
I am hesitant to remove a board that seems to serve a purpose effectively.
Is it possible that removing this forum would increase traffic in our general boards too much?
Is it possible that removing this forum would take away an easy specific way to get answers as a player or DM?
If I'm a brand new player to D&D 4e, and I don't understand a power of the wizard class, where do I post it? Well, it could go in Rules Q&A. Or it could go in Character Building: Controllers. (and, hopefully soon, it would instead go in Classes ;)).
Basically, as best as I can tell, RQ&A seems to be completely redundant with every other forum in that section. That's why I think it should be removed.
To come back to this question:
I PMed Solice (You rock!!) about this and was told that currently, the decision is to stay the course.
Is there any reason Solice is unable to come to the forums herself and state this to the community?
Are we sure GZ just doesn't have a second account that he was always using?
You discuss a lot with Solice in some hidden areas it seems, maybe it is time the community manager did what was needed in the past and be a part of the community. That was the problem with Mike and he was getting trained to be more active and not make decisions behind closed doors or just with some VCL team.
And what does this New Mike have to do with the D&D forums if he was taking over for her in the MtG areas?
Since you seem to be in such contact with her maybe you can relay these ideas, and get these questions answered.
I don't think Insider forums should have anything BUT Insider in it, and a new section should be made for OTHER digital offerings from other people outside of WotC.
Unless I am confused about something and that is not what you are saying about these apps in regards to the DDI forums.....
I understand the reasoning behind elimination of the Rules Q&A area, however, it is very heavily posted in as is our general forums.
I am very against removing this forum. I think it's a valuable resource, and is heavily trafficked. The only think I could recommend would be finding someone to serve as forum lead so questions that would be more appropriate for a more specific forum could be transfered there. (I am not volunteering!)
Also, if I might make a suggestion. If the proposal is going to cause a serious disruption to a specific board, like the character building boards, let's post a stickied message in those forums and ask for comments. Limit the comment period to a week, but just to see what the community there thinks. I think that would help smooth any ruffles by the change, and I see no harm in delaying a reorg for a week to see what comments we get.
I seem to be the one advocating the removal of that forum, so I'll answer. My goal is to make the forums as easy to navigate for a new member as possible. So, with that in mind:
If I'm a brand new player to D&D 4e, and I don't understand a power of the wizard class, where do I post it? Well, it could go in Rules Q&A. Or it could go in Character Building: Controllers. (and, hopefully soon, it would instead go in Classes ;)).
Basically, as best as I can tell, RQ&A seems to be completely redundant with every other forum in that section. That's why I think it should be removed.
What do you do with rules questions that don't have their own forum? Healing surge questions would fit into which subforum?Is there any reason Solice is unable to come to the forums herself and state this to the community?
Dude, she posted a half-hour before your complaint.
D&D Worlds
[INDENT]* Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
* Running the Realms
* Forgotten Realms: Previous Editions
* Eberron
* Other Published Worlds
[INDENT]o Birthright
o Council of Wyrms
o Darksun
o Dragonlance
o Greyhawk
o Mystara
o Planescape
o Ravenloft
o Spelljammer
o Third-Party Published Worlds[/INDENT][/INDENT]
I would love to see something like this.
I too would strongly support this structure. Its the only way any sort of meaningful campaign world discussion will occur, no matter what the post-count was in any one forum.
Denis, aka "Maldin"
Maldin's Greyhawk http://melkot.com
D&D General, at the very minimum.
Don't send general rules questions to D&D General. Rules questions is one of the reasons people come to these boards. Why make it harder for them to find an answer?
Dude, she posted a half-hour before your complaint.
I read forums in order and post when I get to a message that warrants a response interest in me. I don't read forums backwards or some other way.
I read left to right, and top to bottom. Its how the English language works.
I do not see a reason at this point for getting rid of it, but if the boards get re-orged, so it is more clear where to post subjects, then the Rules Q&A should get less traffic and will be less needed. Especially as people start to learn the system which is still fairly new.
In the old forum structure, custom classes were posted in the classes forum, custom races in the races forum, custom feats in the feats forum, and so on. Is that what we want?
I would say yes, simply because you get a more focused sub-community. The old classes forum was filled with members who knew the classes and how to balance them, that could give better advice than if all of those subjects were thrown into a more generic forum.
No, I am hogging Webster all for myself.
I KID! ;)
Community policy, forum changes, things of that nature will happen on the community boards as much as possible. (There may be times, of course, that direction comes from in house. In those cases it may not be discussed first on the forums.)
A quick question, a heads up, or a clarification that can be reported to the masses (or not) can and does happen in PM's. Having the community come to me and alert me when things need my attention is vital to showing the kind of response times and the attention the community deserves.
Oh, and hellmute, your crazy. (See I listen and take suggestions!! ;) )
Oh, and hellmute, your crazy. (See I listen and take suggestions!! ;) )
:P
While I do not know enough about the other sections of the board, I do spend a lot of time reading through the 4e "fundamentals" section. When I came here to read up on what people thought about how the forums should be organized, I notice a mentality that pushing for forum divisions that were very similar to an enhanced version of the boards from 3.X period. While that design worked well for 3.X, I do not believe it will work as effectivly for 4e as it did its predecessor. I thing the 4e forum organization should be built from the ground up just like 4e itself was.
Here are my suggestions for how the 4e "fundamentals" section should look:
- Character Design and Development - Have an idea for character, but just don't know how to stat him up? Or do you have a character almost ready to go and just need some help to flesh out her childhood? Then this is the place to be. This is where you get help perfecting your backstory or eking out that last bonus that will allow your character to be a truly effective hero.
A forum that combines the current Character Development board with the less system breaking parts of the Character Optimization board.
- Class Roles: Defenders - The place to discuss all the powers, feats, paths, destinies and other attributes that make fighters, paladins, swordmages and other defenders so good at keeping enemies off your allies backs.
- Class Roles: Strikers - The place to discuss the powers, feats, paths, destinies and everything else that makes rangers, rogues, warlocks and other strikers so good at dealing out damage.
- Class Roles: Leaders - The place to discuss all the powers, feats, paths, destinies and other attributes that make clerics, warlords, and other leaders help everyone else do better.
- Class Roles: Controllers - The place to discuss all the powers, feats, paths, destinies and other attributes that make wizards and other controllers so good at reshaping the battlefield.
- Class Roles: Multiclassing - The place to discuss power trading, feats, paths, and destinies and other multiclassing benefits as well as multiclass-only classes like the Forgotten Realm's Spellscarred.
As it stands in 4e when classes are examined they are compared to the other classes in their role, this makes it the natural basis for dividing class specific talk up.
- Races and Cultures - The place to discuss races and their cultures as well as all the powers, feats, paths and destinies that make them unique.
Unlike 3.X where their was very little difference between characters and monsters, in 4e races and monsters have completely different design mentalities. They may share some surface similarities, but at their core they work very differently. Just because there could be one thread about new races fr PCs and another one about that race being monsters does not mean they should be combined.
- Equipment and Rituals - The place to talk about all the different things characters can find or spend their hard earned cash on. Feel free to talk about it all, from weapons and armor and those feats and abilities influenced by them to artifacts, alchemy and airships or even magical items and the rituals that create them.
Their should be no argument that there needs to be a board dedicated to equipment. Rituals go with them because how they are gained and used.
- Tactics and Teamwork - The place to talk about how to move and attack in sync with other players and their characters in order for the party to complete its goals.
A new board, but one that should be obvious in hindsight. Because 4e is a much more tactical game, players need a place to come to so that they can talk about tactics.
- Monsters and Other Threats - The place to talk about monsters, traps, skill challenges and other things that stand between heroes and their goals.
The place to talk about everything in game that make completing goals a challenge. Traps are no longer a hit point draining speed bump, but an encounter into themselves.
- Rules Q&A - Have a question about a rule? Here is the place to ask.
- System Stress Analysis or Pun-Pun's Playpen - Think you found a power combination that allows you to single handily kill Orcus at level 3? Or did you find a loophole that gives you infinite income? Do you think a monster is far more powerful than its level suggests? This is the place to talk about those sort of things.
The place to talk about things that need to be fixed. Would be the home of the sort of theoretical optimization that created the feared Pun-Pun in 3.X.
*
Unanswered question from earlier -- I'll restate it, because I'm too lazy to go find my quote:
As a goal, do we want every topic to have one place, or is it OK for a topic to "belong" to more than one location and it's the poster's choice?
The best example still, I think, is homebrewed material. Do we want to make sure all that stuff ends up in the house rules forum, or do we want to allow homebrew in the appropriate forum - for example, a new class in the Classes & Powers forum?
My personal opinion is that allowing it in either forum is best, but I'm open to hearing other opinions.
[edit]Which, ironically enough, is counter to my opinion that the "Rules Q&A" forum should go away...[/edit]
*
The next question: Are there any subject areas that are missing? Are we covering all the bases?
The next question: Are there any subject areas that are missing? Are we covering all the bases?
Traps and Terrain. This should be made a part of the Combat & Tactics section, which is rapidly simply becoming Rules Q&A.
Also, they are called "Epic Destinies" not "Epic Paths"
Planes
Divinities
Environments and Weather
Even combined, these don't go in their own forum.
- D&D Headquarters
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Future Releases
- Product Reviews ([thread=1060447]Discussion about this potential new forum[/thread])
- Related Topics (links to the section below)
- GSL
- Community Business
- 4e D&D Fundamentals
- Classes and Powers
- Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- Races and Monsters
- Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
- Abilities, Skills and Feats
- Combat: Traps, Terrain and Tactics
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- 4e General Discussion
- Classes and Powers
- D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules & Homebrew
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
- What's a DM to Do?
- D&D Insider
- D&Di Announcements
- Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion
- Technical Discussion
- Digital D&D
- D&Di General
- D&Di Announcements
- D&D Worlds
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: General
- Eberron: Eberron Lore
- Eberron: Running Eberron
- Other Published Worlds
- Birthright
- Council of Wyrms
- Darksun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
- Birthright
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- D&D Previous Editions
- Monsters and Races
- Classes and Class Features
- Equipment, Skills, and Feats
- Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
- Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
- Previous Editions General
- Monsters and Races
- RPGs
- RPGs General Discussion
- d20 Modern
- d20 General
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
- RPGs General Discussion
- Related Topics
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
- [forum=347]RPG Gamer Classifieds[/forum]
- [forum=369]The Marketplace[/forum]
- [forum=518]Star Wars RPG[/forum]
- [forum=837]Gaming Culture[/forum]
- [forum=904]Creative Corner[/forum]
- [forum=725]VCL Open Discussion[/forum]
- D&D Fiction
*
Another question, that needs to be answered by somebody familiar with vB software. Can a forum "group" be given a description? For example, can we add a description to "4e D&D Fundamentals" or similar places?
Another question, that needs to be answered by somebody familiar with vB software. Can a forum "group" be given a description? For example, can we add a description to "4e D&D Fundamentals" or similar places?
Found my own answer...
[forum=251]Go here[/forum] and scroll down a bit until you see the Marketplace area. It has a description.
This is something we should most definitely keep in mind. We can use descriptive text for both sections and forums to make it more clear about what goes where.
I agree about Section desctiptions. That's a great idea.
So any ideas on where divinities and planes might go? I guess plane is a type of terrain (as is weather) so it could go into Combat. What about Divinities?
So any ideas on where divinities and planes might go? I guess plane is a type of terrain (as is weather) so it could go into Combat. What about Divinities?
Any idea as to how much it's discussed now? That is, are we talking about a subject that has one or two threads a month, or are we looking at something that has one or two threads a week, or one or two threads a day?
If we're talking one or two threads a month, I'm inclined to let D&D General serve it's purpose as a catch-all for topics not covered by other forums.
If it's more frequent than that, I think we may need to ponder a better home for the subject.
As a goal, do we want every topic to have one place, or is it OK for a topic to "belong" to more than one location and it's the poster's choice?
-Some things, just by virtue of what they are, can fit in multiple places. Rules Q&A, What's a Player/DM to Do?, those two overlap a lot, for example.
I think in terms of power sources rather than the roles.
Classes have been split twice as it is now. Each one has a role and power source, that really makes its class separate from any other.
Marital power source users can so far be defenders or strikers right? What happens when one becomes a controller?
They perform some duty in regards tot he party this way, but for the actual role they are closer to each other in how they perform their duty...the power source.
I could be wrong, but just see the power sources in the long run being the way the classes will be discussed. Am I alone in thinking this about the future?
Do we want them split according to game mechanics or theme/flavour?
Splitting by role is going with game mechanics, while power source, being just an interchangeable keyword with no real game effect, is going by theme & flavour.
I agree that a split by power source seems more natural and nicer, but I don't think it is the most practical choice. Most of the discussions on the current class forums are mechanics-related, and I don't see that changing with a split by power source.
A role split might be a bit harder to get my head around, but I can see the benefits, now and in the future:
- It groups together classes with similar functions, and sometimes with similar game mechanics, instead of classes that have nothing in common except one keyword;
- It makes it easier to discuss comparisons between classes that fulfill the same functions, even if with different means;
- It's extensible: no future forum "creep" for new classes or power sources;
- And because it's worth repeating: it fits the nature of the discussions that usually happens on class forums (even in 3.x!);
- Fighter/Paladin/Swordmage;
- Cleric/Warlord/Artificer;
- Ranger/Rogue/Warlock;
- Wizard;
And with power sources:
- Fighter/Warlord/Ranger/Rogue <--- they all kill things with weapons, but none of them does it the same way;
- Paladin/Cleric; <--- the only group that makes any sense, if only barely. Add a few more classes, it could get uglier;
- Wizard/Warlock/Artificer/Swordmage; <--- a very disparate group of magic users, wouldn't you say? So much so that they would form a balanced party!
I think a split by roles is more 4e's speed.
You currently have a whole forum for Wizards. This shoudl have been an indication of a) a problem with the game design, b) a proble with the topic splits.
Yeah sure more controllers will come out over time, but isn't the Optimization boards the one about the mechanics? So shouldn't the specific aspect of the mechanics lie there, and allow some place to discuss the "flavor"/theme/power source grouping?
Also the grouping of roles makes the forum looks like the game is all about the combat aspects of it rather than anything else. Does being a paladin limit it to its role during combat? And that is all the roles really are is combat positions and designations of duties therein.
So the "roles" are not really Character Building, but Tactical Utilization.
Also as many have noted in various threads most classes have secondary or tertiary "roles" they fit just as well as over their primary defined "role".
So where do you discuss the ranger as a controller?
See notes at the end of the post for questions, thoughts and a request.
D&D Headquarters
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Future Releases
- Related Topics (links to the section below)
- GSL
- VCL Open Discussion (link)
4e D&D Fundamentals
- FIND PLAYERS IN YOUR AREA HERE!
- 4e General Discussion
- 4e Classes and Powers
- 4e Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- 4e Races and Monsters
- 4e Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
- 4e Abilities, Powers, Skills and Feats
- 4e Combat: Traps, Terrain and Tactics
- 4e Character Optimization
- 4e Character Development
- 4e Rules Q&A
D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules & Homebrew
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
- D&Di General
- D&Di Announcements
- Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion
- Technical Discussion
- Digital D&D
D&D Worlds
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: General
- Eberron: Eberron Lore
- Eberron: Running Eberron
- Other Published Worlds
- Birthright
- Council of Wyrms
- Darksun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
D&D Previous Editions
- Previous Editions General
- Monsters and Races
- Classes and Class Features
- Equipment, Skills, and Feats
- Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
- Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
- Previous Editions Rules Q&A
RPGs
- RPGs General Discussion
- d20 Modern
- d20 General
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
Related Topics
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
- RPG Gamer Classifieds
- The Marketplace
- Star Wars RPG
- Gaming Culture
- Creative Corner
I believe it prudent to keep the Rules Q&A forum because of the amount of traffic it, and the other general boards, receive. I am a bit on the fence on this one so I am open to discussion on this matter!
Another point of discussion: Is it prudent to split out classes? If yes, what is the most logical way to do so? Here I have not separated them out but again this is open for your feedback!
Also, I moved the general boards to the top of each section. I realize the theory behind having them as a last place to post, but I also feel it makes the forums harder to learn and navigate as a new player.
The product review forum will be on the back burner at this time. It was suggested that we link to the Enworld review forum; I am open to this idea!
I LOVE the idea of having a directory stickied in the community business forum!
I also love the idea of “Find players in your area here!” as a top forum. (I can not tell you how often I get that question! “Where do I find players?!”
I am completely open to feedback, though in the end I will have to make a call to move forward and start seeing some progress in cleaning up the current structure. I will allow at least a week for comments and discussion before making these changes.
Finally, a request:
Please let others know that this conversation is taking place! I will make an announcement but we all know how those can be over looked. I ask that the community here help me spread the word by making a post in each forum affected letting people know the changes that are being discussed. I will do them myself if need be, but the more support I get from you folks the better!
But what happens when more power sources come out and the "roles" forums get clogged?
They'll get "clogged" with mechanically similar classes, so I'll risk saying it won't be as dire a problem.
You currently have a whole forum for Wizards. This shoudl have been an indication of a) a problem with the game design, b) a proble with the topic splits.
That will change, as you yourself point out. More controllers will come.
Yeah sure more controllers will come out over time, but isn't the Optimization boards the one about the mechanics? So shouldn't the specific aspect of the mechanics lie there, and allow some place to discuss the "flavor"/theme/power source grouping?
I could point out that the Optimization board's counterpart, Character Development, should be the place to talk about the the "flavor"/theme/power source maters.
The mechanics discussions that go on in the class forums are kind of different than the ones on CharOp. The class forums are more about understanding the rules and discussing the mechanics of your new character, yakking about new classes, etc. CharOp is all about system mastery, sometimes un-playable concept characters, maths, stats & probs, and yeah, "breaking" the system just for the sheer fun of it
. They do bleed a bit into each other, but the separation is clear to see.Also the grouping of roles makes the forum looks like the game is all about the combat aspects of it rather than anything else. Does being a paladin limit it to its role during combat? And that is all the roles really are is combat positions and designations of duties therein.
So the "roles" are not really Character Building, but Tactical Utilization.
Yeah, I know. But that is already the kind of discussion (mechanics & tactics) that goes on in there, in large volumes. A new class forum split should go with the flow instead of fighting it, is what I think.
Also as many have noted in various threads most classes have secondary or tertiary "roles" they fit just as well as over their primary defined "role".
So where do you discuss the ranger as a controller?
You discuss it with the Strikers. The Strikers forum would be the place to talk about rangers, so even if you're talking about the controller aspect of the ranger (if that was his 2ndary role - I think he's more a 2ndary defender), you're still talking about the ranger, so it's not off topic.
For multiclass characters, ranger/wizard for example, talk about it in the multiclass forum. A ranger/warlock topic would fit in either Strikers ('cause warlock is a striker too) or the multiclass forum.
It's not a perfect solution, but I see less problems with it than splitting with power sources, which seems a bit arbitrary.
Link to ENWrold would be the worse thing you could do. Might as well close down the WotC D&D forums and let ENWorld handle it all. I don't visit there and don't want to. A product review forum should be HERE if it is even ONLY for WotC products at this time. If 3PP cannot be included for some legal reason within these forums, them maybe a sticky in the "WotC D&D Product Review" forum could link to the proper area on ENWorld.org to locate reviews of 3PP products.
I think class separation should be based on power sources, as that is how they will appear in future products, as well as how they work in there core for the classes.
No class is really limited to a single "role" so it makes little sense to have them split thusly.
I also still think there would be benefit to adding a D&D General Discussion to the D&D Community section that transcends editions.
Like how Astrid's is currently discussing opening up the definition to transcend genders from "girl-only" issues, to general gender related gaming issues.
Also I think a redesign of the descriptions of some of the forums may be in order, but you probably want to get the structure down before adding the window-dressing.
I believe it prudent to keep the Rules Q&A forum because of the amount of traffic it, and the other general boards, receive. I am a bit on the fence on this one so I am open to discussion on this matter!
The biggest matter to work out, I think, remains the "can one topic have two (or more) viable discussion locations?" question. If it's OK for me to ask about a rogue's sneak attack ability in both Classes and Rules Q&A, then there's no problem. If there should be a division, it needs to be real clear what that division is.
Another point of discussion: Is it prudent to split out classes? If yes, what is the most logical way to do so? Here I have not separated them out but again this is open for your feedback!
I'm personally inclined to give it one forum and see how it goes. I know 4e and 3.5 are very different systems; that said, one "Class" forum (with a Prestige Class subforum) worked well. I think it's worth trying again.
Also, I moved the general boards to the top of each section. I realize the theory behind having them as a last place to post, but I also feel it makes the forums harder to learn and navigate as a new player.
Could you elaborate on why?
I know I can tell you from personal experience here that if you put General at the top, it'll leech traffic away from the other forums, such as Classes.
The product review forum will be on the back burner at this time. It was suggested that we link to the Enworld review forum; I am open to this idea!
No! Please don't do this! I can't access EnWorld from work.
I also love the idea of “Find players in your area here!” as a top forum. (I can not tell you how often I get that question! “Where do I find players?!”
Given how many times I've answered that question, I think I have an idea. ;)
I am completely open to feedback, though in the end I will have to make a call to move forward and start seeing some progress in cleaning up the current structure. I will allow at least a week for comments and discussion before making these changes.
Totally reasonable.
I recommend that once the structure seems pretty well nailed down, we also look at re-writing (or in some cases adding) descriptions, where necessary. For example, those section descriptions I talked about earlier.
Another point of discussion: Is it prudent to split out classes? If yes, what is the most logical way to do so? Here I have not separated them out but again this is open for your feedback!
Personally, I see roles as being the best way to split out the classes. There are a limited number of roles, and this would limit the number of sub-forums that are present. If there is a particular forum that gets a *lot* of posts, then it might be worthwhile looking at creating sub fora for that forum.
The product review forum will be on the back burner at this time. It was suggested that we link to the Enworld review forum; I am open to this idea!
This is a good idea. Having a link to an external review site, especially one with as good a reputation as ENWorld, will be handy. IIRC, ENWorld has it set up so that you can get an RSS feed for new topics in a variety of forums. I should check to see if they have that available for the Reviews forum.
I could point out that the Optimization board's counterpart, Character Development, should be the place to talk about the the "flavor"/theme/power source maters.
then is there really a need for other class based forums if you already have them both covered in CO and CD?
Yeah, I know. But that is already the kind of discussion (mechanics & tactics) that goes on in there, in large volumes. A new class forum split should go with the flow instead of fighting it, is what I think.
The current "flow" is only because that was the decision that Gamer_Zer0 got from R&D as how to split the class discussion into several forums.
You discuss it with the Strikers. The Strikers forum would be the place to talk about rangers, so even if you're talking about the controller aspect of the ranger (if that was his 2ndary role - I think he's more a 2ndary defender), you're still talking about the ranger, so it's not off topic.
There is a problem. If you say the strikers forum, then you should be tlaking about the role of strikers, not just classes that happen to be defined in the book as a striker.
So you should be able to discuss a controller (I think it would work so hush!) ranger in the controller forum, if those roles are the purpose of discussion.
Why would you talk about controllers in a striker forum? Is the striker forum jsut a catchy name for the warlock/ranger/rogue forume because calling it the warlock/ranger/rogue forum would be silly, and you would have to add the other classes that perform the striker duties to the name of the forum as they come out?
For multiclass characters, ranger/wizard for example, talk about it in the multiclass forum. A ranger/warlock topic would fit in either Strikers ('cause warlock is a striker too) or the multiclass forum.
Yes, I think amalgam characters should have just one forum. I like some multiclassing, but it needs to be centralized in one place rather than spread through the individual subforums for specific class/whatnot.
It's not a perfect solution, but I see less problems with it than splitting with power sources, which seems a bit arbitrary.
But the classes are designed based on those power sources, so even the roles they perform as fundamentally a function of what was created through that power source.
Maybe we need a new thread to discuss the actual class splitting of the forums and these posts can be carried over, because there are many ways to look at it....
I think class separation should be based on power sources, as that is how they will appear in future products, as well as how they work in there core for the classes.
The problem with that is you get "forum creep" as you add new power sources.
Many years ago, the forums used to be organized by book. There was a forum for Defenders of the Faith, a forum for Tome and Blood, a forum for Song and Silence, and so on. And that structure had the same problem -- eventually there were just too damn many forums, all discussing (basically) the same thing.
Organizing by power source would have the same problem. Sure, right now you only have Martial, Divine and Arcane. Soon, though, we'll have psionic and nature and whatever else is coming down the pike in the future. The structure would get out of hand very quick. And that's not supposition; it was proven in the past, when the amount of traffic on the forums was much smaller.
then is there really a need for other class based forums if you already have them both covered in CO and CD?
You very obviously do not understand the purpose of CO or CD.
...
I think class separation should be based on power sources, as that is how they will appear in future products, as well as how they work in there core for the classes.
No class is really limited to a single "role" so it makes little sense to have them split thusly.
...
It would not make sense in 2e or even 3e terms. For 4e, it does.
Could you elaborate on why?
I know I can tell you from personal experience here that if you put General at the top, it'll leech traffic away from the other forums, such as Classes.
I think that with some detailed FAQs that include a "What do I post about here" section, this should, in theory, be alleviated.
I lied. I am making my proposal a day early. ;)
See notes at the end of the post for questions, thoughts and a request.
[BRPGs
- RPGs General Discussion
- d20 Modern
- d20 General
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
!
What exactly would go inot D20 General?
The biggest matter to work out, I think, remains the "can one topic have two (or more) viable discussion locations?" question. If it's OK for me to ask about a rogue's sneak attack ability in both Classes and Rules Q&A, then there's no problem. If there should be a division, it needs to be real clear what that division is.
The division to me seems to be if you have a quick need an answer to a rule vs discussion. One is Q&A the other is discussion beyond a quick fact check.
Could you elaborate on why?
General is the first stop for most users, if they have to spend time hunting for the lobby their experience will be less possitive. I believe that through a directory of "where to post" as a sticky and through training our newer posters we can keep it from becoming a complete magnet. I am open to debate on this however!
I recommend that once the structure seems pretty well nailed down, we also look at re-writing (or in some cases adding) descriptions, where necessary. For example, those section descriptions I talked about earlier.
I agree with you, hellmute and others on this. Lets get this structure clarified, ratified than french fried then we can look at descriptions.
If they end up needing to be split I think roles make the most sense. That way you are talking about classes that do similar things in one place.
I think a FAQ about where to post and some other basic questions would make putting the General Boards back at the bottom reasonable.
I think that with some detailed FAQs that include a "What do I post about here" section, this should, in theory, be alleviated.
Well, on average people read only what they absolutely must. A FAQ will be read by a minority of new posters, but the list of forums, no one can get around reading that.
I'm all for putting General forums at the end.
On the matter of class forums: a single forum is fine too. If a split is ever considered in the future, we'll cross that bridge when we get there. Maybe the additional classes will provide new insight into the mater. As it stands now, I still think roles are the way to do it.
The problem with that is you get "forum creep" as you add new power sources.
Many years ago, the forums used to be organized by book. There was a forum for Defenders of the Faith, a forum for Tome and Blood, a forum for Song and Silence, and so on. And that structure had the same problem -- eventually there were just too damn many forums, all discussing (basically) the same thing.
Organizing by power source would have the same problem. Sure, right now you only have Martial, Divine and Arcane. Soon, though, we'll have psionic and nature and whatever else is coming down the pike in the future. The structure would get out of hand very quick. And that's not supposition; it was proven in the past, when the amount of traffic on the forums was much smaller.
Do you not think that this "forum creep" will not happen anyway?
You are thinking about specific traffic to a forum agian.
Leave traffic out of the idea.
So what if a forum ends up with more traffic this month because a new power source book came out?
It will die down and stagnate again tot he natural amount after the novelty of the new classes for that product has worn off.
Then you get arcane and while martial power source forum has died down, you get a spike in the arcane because that is where the new novelty is.
It is still one person that is the VCL for that whole area right? So it will not create more work for them to have it via roles or power source, but having it by power source will allow to know EXACTLY where new discussion will spur up and when. So you could monitor it better.
Likewise this gives WotC the chance to see in one location what people think of the new product you go to the Martial power source forum when that book comes out and see the majority of discussion about all those things in it.
Likewise AV will cause a spike in the equipment/items forum. You will not avod the creep or spike in traffic because the nature in which the products are put out.
New item books will cause that forum to spike with interest, new adventure will likewise hit that forum, and so on.
The division to me seems to be if you have a quick need an answer to a rule vs discussion. One is Q&A the other is discussion beyond a quick fact check.
Until RAW vs RAI comes into play. Then a simple question for a quick answer turns into a discussion/argument/war.
Once a forum's "populace" drops beneath a certain amount, it becomes basically deserted. Questions go unanswered, and new people who ask those questions decide not to continue to participate in the community.
Even experienced forumgoers who may have loved that supplement will drift away as perhaps they change to SWSE, or even simply feel a need to stop discussing Martial Power. Now, if the Martial Power forum is amalgamated with several forums (including one that will be visited by the forumgoer) he'll always be on hand to answer any questions related to Martial Power, both informing the community and helping it grow.
If people do stop answering them, then maybe they went on vacation or took a break.
There are highs and lows in peaks for ANYTHING that happens online. Trying to predict what will happen traffic-wise is like trying to predict the weather.
Do you not think that this "forum creep" will not happen anyway?
You are thinking about specific traffic to a forum agian.
Leave traffic out of the idea.
So what if a forum ends up with more traffic this month because a new power source book came out?
It will die down and stagnate again tot he natural amount after the novelty of the new classes for that product has worn off.
Then you get arcane and while martial power source forum has died down, you get a spike in the arcane because that is where the new novelty is.
It is still one person that is the VCL for that whole area right? So it will not create more work for them to have it via roles or power source, but having it by power source will allow to know EXACTLY where new discussion will spur up and when. So you could monitor it better.
Likewise this gives WotC the chance to see in one location what people think of the new product you go to the Martial power source forum when that book comes out and see the majority of discussion about all those things in it.
Likewise AV will cause a spike in the equipment/items forum. You will not avod the creep or spike in traffic because the nature in which the products are put out.
New item books will cause that forum to spike with interest, new adventure will likewise hit that forum, and so on.
This shows why you don't understand what Zherog meant by Forum Creep.
As power sources currently stand we have 3 power sources: Arcane, Divine and Martial. With the release of the PH2 in 2009 we will have a 4th: Primal. Come 2010 we will have the release of the PH3 which is suspected to come with between 1 and 3 new power sources. Each of following Players Handbook is also expected have between 1 and 3 new power sources.
This means that we would be adding at least one new board every year, with a lot of cross board traffic as players compare new classes to the other classes that share their roles.
This means that we would be adding at least one new board every year, with a lot of cross board traffic as players compare new classes to the other classes that share their roles.
Do you really think that the only think that will happen is new power sources will come out rather than stuff for existing ones....oh wait! Martial power source already exists and that means they already ARE creating new things for existing power sources.
So what if you must create a new forum?
You don't have the 3 minutes max it takes to make that forum and open it?
If WotC is that pressed for time, then they shouldn't even have forums.
It is not that big a deal to add a new forum when something creates a need for it, be that wrecan with the thread counts thread, or some new product.
It is not that big of a deal to add a forum or two each year.
Do you really think that the only think that will happen is new power sources will come out rather than stuff for existing ones....oh wait! Martial power source already exists and that means they already ARE creating new things for existing power sources.
So what if you must create a new forum?
You don't have the 3 minutes max it takes to make that forum and open it?
If WotC is that pressed for time, then they shouldn't even have forums.
It is not that big a deal to add a new forum when something creates a need for it, be that wrecan with the thread counts thread, or some new product.
It is not that big of a deal to add a forum or two each year.
Holy Misconstrued Arguments Batman! I didn't say anything about them stopping support of any power source. I was just saying we are expecting to have up to 8 power sources by 2011, and that is a lot of boards to have several topics crossing over.Do you not think that this "forum creep" will not happen anyway?
You are thinking about specific traffic to a forum agian.
Leave traffic out of the idea.
So what if a forum ends up with more traffic this month because a new power source book came out?
It will die down and stagnate again tot he natural amount after the novelty of the new classes for that product has worn off.
Re-read what I wrote, please. I said nothing about traffic to a specific forum.
If we are going to split the class forum into multiple forums based on power source, then we need to add new forums when new power sources are released - just like we used to add new forums when new books were released.
We currently have three power sources. PHB2 will (I believe) introduce three more new ones. PHB3 will likely introduce more. Other books are likely to introduce power sources as well.
That is the forum creep I was talking about; it had nothing to do with the number of threads in a forum.
This shows why you don't understand what Sebby meant by Forum Creep.
Psst. It was me, not Sebby. ;)
2008- Martial, Arcane, Divine
2009-
2010-
2011-
4 years with less than 3 per year, does not seem to be that big a problem to give each a new forum to discuss the new novel item each year, as other power source opgrades will still be made and keep the other furms going is all I am saying.
Adding a forum for something new is not that big an issue.
If it is and that big of a problem, then you have bigger problems with your forums.
The forum structure NEVER has to stagnate to where no new topic area can be added.
Do you really think that the only think that will happen is new power sources will come out rather than stuff for existing ones....oh wait! Martial power source already exists and that means they already ARE creating new things for existing power sources.
So what if you must create a new forum?
You don't have the 3 minutes max it takes to make that forum and open it?
If WotC is that pressed for time, then they shouldn't even have forums.
It is not that big a deal to add a new forum when something creates a need for it, be that wrecan with the thread counts thread, or some new product.
It is not that big of a deal to add a forum or two each year.
It has nothing at all to do with the three minutes it would take to add a new forum. Instead, it has everything to do with what the forums look like to a new user, and how confusing it becomes to discuss material.
Like I said earlier, WotC has already been down this road and learned this lesson with the 3.0 splat books. It was a mistake to do it that way, and that mistake was corrected. Let's learn from that and not make the same mistake again, eh?
I am not saying give KotS or SoW their own forum.....
The problem is the size of the "Fundamentals" section. As it grows, people will become less likely to look around for the best fit for their topic. Then one of three things will happen (if they post):
- They post in the first forum. (and yes, this happened a lot back then
- They post in D&D General
- They dig around and find the right forum
Only one of those three is a good thing. Keep the number of forums to a minimum.
-I remember someone brought this up a long time ago, concerning the character forums. Why not give them "special names"? For example, for Clerics, Paladins, and any other future classes that are of the same vein, the forum would be "Defenders of the Faith". Something like that...I don't know.
I wouldn't recommend that as it will only increase the confusion as to what goes where.
I like Solice's proposal (since it's very similar to mine). I really don't understand any of hellmute's concerns, and while I'm amenable to eventually splitting Classes & Powers by Power Source, rather than Class Role (a split I despise), I am as concerned as Zherog about overwhelming the Fundamentals section with too many forums.
What is with all the sizing and traffic stuff anyway?
Make classes a subforum of fundamentals, like Guy's Rulings is/was a subforum of DDM General.
One extra click to get to the classes, but you have a cleaner main forum page, and a cleaner classes forum page.
That is why vBulletin has a category hierarchy to begin with so you can create subforums.
I wouldn't recommend that as it will only increase the confusion as to what goes where.
-Just saying. Personally, I am wholly confused as it is, as to where things are supposed to go, when I have threads that I have to be moved elsewhere, and trying to figure out where it is they go, not being familiar with the 4e terminology. Things that are not specific, ie, "Blasters, Strikers, Stealers, whatever" would lessen that problem for others. Separating things into power sources wouldn't necessary be very helpful, either. But, again, I'm just saying.
It would help promote Organized Play and help people find places to experience Forgotten Realms.
As long as I'm making requests a point to RPGA General near the "Where to find players" forum might be nice too, since RPGA play happens worldwide.
The single Classes and single prestige classes board worked very well. We didn't need a "fighter forum", a "wizard forum" and so on. The same goes for power sources.
We just don't want too many forums. A "What to post where" will be very handy and something we can/will do, but we also don't want to make the boards to intimidating to newcomers. Just look at the list already.
If Solice wants the General forum at that top, I say we should try it. If I find myself moving way too many threads on a regular basis, I'll bring the issue up with her about dropping it back to the bottom.
For the review forum, a link to EN world is the best way to go. Opinions won't be labeld as "biased". Plus, people can see reviews of other products as well.
If people want to know what others think of the game, they can just read the boards. The opinions are the discussions.
When someone picks up a D&D book, they don't think "I want to play a defender!". They think "I want to play an elf cleric."
Thus a general "Classes" and a "Races" board is better for discussions.
Would it be possible to get a pointer to Living Forgotten Realms in the RPGA forum near/under the Forgotten Realms forums?
It would help promote Organized Play and help people find places to experience Forgotten Realms.
As long as I'm making requests a point to RPGA General near the "Where to find players" forum might be nice too, since RPGA play happens worldwide.
Both are possible, yes. :D
Let me add that categories such as "Striker" and "Controller" are more game design terms, not so much game play terms.
When someone picks up a D&D book, they don't think "I want to play a defender!". They think "I want to play an elf cleric."
Thus a general "Classes" and a "Races" board is better for discussions.
I am sorry but R&D would disagree with you as well as WotC_Stokley, as was the reason for the "role" splits of the classes initially by Gamer_Zer0.
Surprisingly I agree with you, that people think elf cleric is what they want to play, but WotC seems to disagree, or did; thus why those "role" forums exist.
There is no real NEED to split classes, but it was asked IF they were split how to do so....
However, I feel it is a mistake to combine the Dragon and Dungeon article discussions into the same forum section. Dragon is for everyone, and Dungeon is for DMs. I don't think it's helpful to have Dungeon info on the same forum section that players frequent, because they will invariably see info they aren't "supposed to" about adventures they may be in. They will also see info they don't "want to" see, which may spoil the adventures a bit for them.
In a Dungeon section we could discuss monster powers and the flow of adventures and such, but that info is not something players should read by accident.
I am sorry but R&D would disagree with you as well as WotC_Stockley, as was the reason for the "role" splits of the classes initially by Gamer_Zer0.
It doesn't bother me if R&D disagrees with me. The boards need to be organized to find things easily.
If R&D wants information such as what's people's favorite role, we can most certainly start a poll or something, or they can come on the board to talk with people about it.
:D
However, I feel it is a mistake to combine the Dragon and Dungeon article discussions into the same forum section. Dragon is for everyone, and Dungeon is for DMs.
Would you mind adding this opinion to this thread please?
[thread=1081775]Dragon and Dungeon content[/thread]
Strictly for my curiosity and idea collection, but WotC is free to use any information gathered in it as well.
OK, I'm not going to read 9 pages of this.
However, I feel it is a mistake to combine the Dragon and Dungeon article discussions into the same forum section. Dragon is for everyone, and Dungeon is for DMs. I don't think it's helpful to have Dungeon info on the same forum section that players frequent, because they will invariably see info they aren't "supposed to" about adventures they may be in. They will also see info they don't "want to" see, which may spoil the adventures a bit for them.
In a Dungeon section we could discuss monster powers and the flow of adventures and such, but that info is not something players should read by accident.
I don't follow you. Stuff will still be in separate threads. The only way a player could get a spoiler is by clicking on the thread -- which they can do right now.
It doesn't bother me if R&D disagrees with me. The boards need to be organized to find things easily.
If R&D wants information such as what's people's favorite role, we can most certainly start a poll or something, or they can come on the board to talk with people about it.
:D
Just so long as those blasted roles are gotten rid of in the forum titles I will feel more comfortable and less gamey. (both in the wildlife sense and D&D mechanics sense)
then is there really a need for other class based forums if you already have them both covered in CO and CD?
That's not what CO and CD are about.
The current "flow" is only because that was the decision that Gamer_Zer0 got from R&D as how to split the class discussion into several forums.
Even a broken clock gets to be right twice a day? Not everything GZ did turned to crap. Even in the legacy class forum(s), class discussions were about mechanics. A split along those lines, if there is to be one, makes sense. The point is moot anyway, the idea of a split is dead. And I am fine with that.
...
But the classes are designed based on those power sources, so even the roles they perform as fundamentally a function of what was created through that power source.
Just for the sake of discussion (pardon the digression):
The theme of a class is based in part on its power source, but not its role. The power source names mean nothing mechanically. The designers, in the dozen articles about converting characters from 3.5e to 4e, are liberally advocating reflavouring powers and classes by changing, amongst other things, the power sources.
Or, look at the arcane classes: wizard (controller), warlock (striker), artificer (leader), swordmage (defender): every role is covered. There is no corelation between role and power source.
Maybe we need a new thread to discuss the actual class splitting of the forums and these posts can be carried over, because there are many ways to look at it...
If we continue this discussion, that would be better.
I lied. I am making my proposal a day early. ;)
See notes at the end of the post for questions, thoughts and a request.
D&D Headquarters
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Future Releases
- Related Topics (links to the section below)
- GSL
- VCL Open Discussion (link)
4e D&D Fundamentals
- FIND PLAYERS IN YOUR AREA HERE!
- 4e General Discussion
- 4e Classes and Powers
- 4e Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- 4e Races and Monsters
- 4e Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
- 4e Abilities, Powers, Skills and Feats
- 4e Combat: Traps, Terrain and Tactics
- 4e Character Optimization
- 4e Character Development
- 4e Rules Q&A
D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules & Homebrew
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
- D&Di General
- D&Di Announcements
- Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion
- Technical Discussion
- Digital D&D
D&D Worlds[INDENT]
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: General
- Eberron: Eberron Lore
- Eberron: Running Eberron
- Other Published Worlds
[/INDENT]
- Birthright
- Council of Wyrms
- Darksun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
D&D Previous Editions
- Previous Editions General
- Monsters and Races
- Classes and Class Features
- Equipment, Skills, and Feats
- Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
- Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
- Previous Editions Rules Q&A
RPGs
- RPGs General Discussion
- d20 Modern
- d20 General
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
Related Topics
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
- RPG Gamer Classifieds
- The Marketplace
- Star Wars RPG
- Gaming Culture
- Creative Corner
I believe it prudent to keep the Rules Q&A forum because of the amount of traffic it, and the other general boards, receive. I am a bit on the fence on this one so I am open to discussion on this matter!
Another point of discussion: Is it prudent to split out classes? If yes, what is the most logical way to do so? Here I have not separated them out but again this is open for your feedback!
Also, I moved the general boards to the top of each section. I realize the theory behind having them as a last place to post, but I also feel it makes the forums harder to learn and navigate as a new player.
The product review forum will be on the back burner at this time. It was suggested that we link to the Enworld review forum; I am open to this idea!
I LOVE the idea of having a directory stickied in the community business forum!
I also love the idea of “Find players in your area here!” as a top forum. (I can not tell you how often I get that question! “Where do I find players?!”
I am completely open to feedback, though in the end I will have to make a call to move forward and start seeing some progress in cleaning up the current structure. I will allow at least a week for comments and discussion before making these changes.
Finally, a request:
Please let others know that this conversation is taking place! I will make an announcement but we all know how those can be over looked. I ask that the community here help me spread the word by making a post in each forum affected letting people know the changes that are being discussed. I will do them myself if need be, but the more support I get from you folks the better!
I like ths setup overall, you may want to split the classes and powers at some later date, perferably by power source. On the surface this may seem confusing, but it makes sense if you look at it in terms of existing forums, classes by power source allow the flavor of the source to be maintained. Pure mechanics are discussed in the CO forum and character fluff in the CD forum.
Bel
Only one thing is confusing me: if I want to talk about a power, do I do it in 4e Classes and Powers or 4e Abilities, Powers, Skills and Feats?
I lied. I am making my proposal a day early. ;)
See notes at the end of the post for questions, thoughts and a request.Show
D&D Headquarters
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Future Releases
- Related Topics (links to the section below)
- GSL
- VCL Open Discussion (link)
4e D&D Fundamentals
- FIND PLAYERS IN YOUR AREA HERE!
- 4e General Discussion
- 4e Classes and Powers
- 4e Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- 4e Races and Monsters
- 4e Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
- 4e Abilities, Powers, Skills and Feats
- 4e Combat: Traps, Terrain and Tactics
- 4e Character Optimization
- 4e Character Development
- 4e Rules Q&A
D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules & Homebrew
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
- D&Di General
- D&Di Announcements
- Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion
- Technical Discussion
- Digital D&D
D&D Worlds[INDENT]
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: General
- Eberron: Eberron Lore
- Eberron: Running Eberron
- Other Published Worlds
[/INDENT]
- Birthright
- Council of Wyrms
- Darksun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
D&D Previous Editions
- Previous Editions General
- Monsters and Races
- Classes and Class Features
- Equipment, Skills, and Feats
- Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
- Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
- Previous Editions Rules Q&A
RPGs
- RPGs General Discussion
- d20 Modern
- d20 General
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
Related Topics
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
- RPG Gamer Classifieds
- The Marketplace
- Star Wars RPG
- Gaming Culture
- Creative Corner
I believe it prudent to keep the Rules Q&A forum because of the amount of traffic it, and the other general boards, receive. I am a bit on the fence on this one so I am open to discussion on this matter!
Another point of discussion: Is it prudent to split out classes? If yes, what is the most logical way to do so? Here I have not separated them out but again this is open for your feedback!
Also, I moved the general boards to the top of each section. I realize the theory behind having them as a last place to post, but I also feel it makes the forums harder to learn and navigate as a new player.
The product review forum will be on the back burner at this time. It was suggested that we link to the Enworld review forum; I am open to this idea!
I LOVE the idea of having a directory stickied in the community business forum!
I also love the idea of “Find players in your area here!” as a top forum. (I can not tell you how often I get that question! “Where do I find players?!”
I am completely open to feedback, though in the end I will have to make a call to move forward and start seeing some progress in cleaning up the current structure. I will allow at least a week for comments and discussion before making these changes.
Finally, a request:
Please let others know that this conversation is taking place! I will make an announcement but we all know how those can be over looked. I ask that the community here help me spread the word by making a post in each forum affected letting people know the changes that are being discussed. I will do them myself if need be, but the more support I get from you folks the better!
Bel
Powers belongs with Classes only.
I think it's 4E Classes and Powers, then 4E Abilities, Skills and Feats.
Bel
That's not how it is currently though (in Solice's proposition). That's why I asked.
It would be better if powers were discussed only in 4E Classes and Powers.
Solice -- this is one small thing in your proposal I think you ought to tweak, for clarity.
I lied. I am making my proposal a day early. ;)
See notes at the end of the post for questions, thoughts and a request.
[ . . . ]
D&D Worlds[INDENT]
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: General
- Eberron: Eberron Lore
- Eberron: Running Eberron
- Other Published Worlds
[/INDENT]
- Birthright
- Council of Wyrms
- Darksun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
[ . . . ]
Finally, a request:
Please let others know that this conversation is taking place! I will make an announcement but we all know how those can be over looked. I ask that the community here help me spread the word by making a post in each forum affected letting people know the changes that are being discussed. I will do them myself if need be, but the more support I get from you folks the better!
First, many thanks for adopting the proposal to split the major D&D settings into separate forums. I understood why they were merged, but I always disagreed with the decision, and I will be happy to see them separated again.
Second, I did post an announcement about this thread in the Other Published Worlds forum, and I've seen some of those people post comments here in support of giving each major setting its own forum.
Finally, a couple of comments on the "other worlds" section of the proposal:
[indent]1. I think it should be "Dark Sun" instead of "Darksun."
2. Did "Council of Wyrms" have its own forum before the merger? If not, then I would suggest that it receive the same treatment as "Ghostwalk" and Rokugan (3E Oriental Adventures) and be left for inclusion in the "Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)" catch-all. I don't think there were more than one or two products for "Council of Wyrms," so I think that distinguishes it from the rest of the listed settings.[/indent]
Why is Eberron getting separated into 2 Boards
In preparation for when the 3 books of the Eberron Campaign setting are released next year. I strongly suspect that the campaigbn setting released the year after will end up with the same thing done.
But then again, I'm not telling you anything you don't already know. ;)
Well, at first FR was only one forum too. When it got split into two, that was based entirely on the traffic volume of the single FR forum; and Eberron doesn't have the magical traffic numbers to split for that reason.
Don't get me wrong, I don't care whether or not Eberron is split into 2 boards. I was merely asking as it has nowhere near the "magic numbers" you are talking about
Basically, my expectation is that chatter about Eberron will pick up as we get closer to the release of the 4e campaign setting. Now, it probably won't be quite as contentious as FR, since there was no timeline fast forward or anything like that. But there should be plenty of other things to discuss -- how they got dragonborn into the setting without using the "Oh, they've always been there; you just never noticed" schtick, for example.
We certainly could wait until some point in time next year to make the forum split. As I said, though, I think it's better to go throw the "pain" of re-organizing once.
D&D Headquarters
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Future Releases
- Related Topics (links to the section below)
- GSL
- VCL Open Discussion (link)
4e D&D Fundamentals
- FIND PLAYERS IN YOUR AREA HERE!
- 4e Classes and Powers
- 4e Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- 4e Races and Monsters
- 4e Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
- 4e Abilities, Skills and Feats
- 4e Combat: Traps, Terrain and Tactics
- 4e Character Optimization
- 4e Character Development
- 4e Rules Q&A
- 4e General Discussion
D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules & Homebrew
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
- D&Di Announcements
- Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion
- Technical Discussion
- Digital D&D
- D&Di General
D&D Worlds
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: General
- Eberron: Eberron Lore
- Eberron: Running Eberron
- Other Published Worlds
- Birthright
- Dark sun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
D&D Previous Editions
- Monsters and Races
- Classes and Class Features
- Equipment, Skills, and Feats
- Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
- Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
- Previous Editions Rules Q&A
- Previous Editions General
RPGs
- d20 Modern
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
- RPGs General Discussion
Related Topics
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
- RPG Gamer Classifieds
- The Marketplace
- Star Wars RPG
- Gaming Culture
- Creative Corner
I agree that we need to consider descriptions for a lot of these forums. I will give it the weekend for people to discuss this proposal then I will post the forum structure and we will move on to focusing on descriptions.
Thank you all for your brain power! ;)
Most recent update based on feedback and reflection:
D&D Headquarters
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Future Releases
- Related Topics (links to the section below)
- GSL
- VCL Open Discussion (link)
4e D&D Fundamentals
- FIND PLAYERS IN YOUR AREA HERE!
- 4e Classes and Powers
- 4e Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- 4e Races and Monsters
- 4e Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
- 4e Abilities, Skills and Feats
- 4e Combat: Traps, Terrain and Tactics
- 4e Character Optimization
- 4e Character Development
- 4e Rules Q&A
- 4e General Discussion
D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules & Homebrew
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
- D&Di Announcements
- Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion
- Technical Discussion
- Digital D&D
- D&Di General
D&D Worlds[INDENT]
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: General
- Eberron: Eberron Lore
- Eberron: Running Eberron
- Other Published Worlds
[/INDENT]
- Birthright
- Dark sun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
D&D Previous Editions
- Monsters and Races
- Classes and Class Features
- Equipment, Skills, and Feats
- Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
- Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
- Previous Editions Rules Q&A
- Previous Editions General
RPGs
- d20 Modern
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
- RPGs General Discussion
Related Topics
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
- RPG Gamer Classifieds
- The Marketplace
- Star Wars RPG
- Gaming Culture
- Creative Corner
I agree that we need to consider descriptions for a lot of these forums. I will give it the weekend for people to discuss this proposal then I will post the forum structure and we will move on to focusing on descriptions.
Thank you all for your brain power! ;)
Does this listing mean that my request for RPGA pointers is declined, and if I keep nagging about it I'll be beating a dead horse?
Or is it simply under consideration or otherwise missed in the traffic flow?
-Keeping the hope alive.
Does this listing mean that my request for RPGA pointers is declined, and if I keep nagging about it I'll be beating a dead horse?
Or is it simply under consideration or otherwise missed in the traffic flow?
-Keeping the hope alive.
Links, please?
I think your idea is a fine one, and having the links to add to the list would help.Or is it simply under consideration or otherwise missed in the traffic flow?
-Keeping the hope alive.
This.
Thank you for pointing it out!
I am not converting to 4E, so please don't shut down the Previous Editions forums, as I will only be visiting those.
The previous edition forums are still listed in Solice's master list. They should still be there for your enjoyment when this reorg happens.
Most recent update based on feedback and reflection:
D&D Worlds[INDENT]
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: General
- Eberron: Eberron Lore
- Eberron: Running Eberron
- Other Published Worlds
[/INDENT]
- Birthright
- Dark sun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
For what it's worth, I would be quite pleased with this arrangement. Thank you, Solice, for your consideration.
2. What will be actually discussed in: "Classes and Powers, Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies, Races and Monsters, Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items, Abilities, Powers, Skills and Feats"?
It can't be rules Q&A
You're looking at it backwards. Rules Q&A is for rules questions that don't belong in the other forums. Go to the specific forum before going to the general forum.
It's not constructive to lump multiclassing, paths & destinies together. Multi is a whole topic to itself where as discussion of paths and destinies are better kept with the class/role of the character in question.
So... If I have a question about the demigod epic destiny, which class/role forum would I discuss that in?
I don't see the point of "Find Players" as a top forum. If you have players, this is a totally useless forum. If you don't have players, then you will scroll down to access it, I would think. It should definitely be a resource, but I really don't want to see it at the top.
I'm torn. On the one hand, I know how often people used to start threads in both this forum and D&D General asking where to go to find a group -- even though a link was available in the D&D General description. So I know it's a topic that comes up often enough. By putting a link to that forum in a more prominent location, it might help.
In addition, experience tells me people don't scroll down to find something. If it's not readily visible right near the top, they'll post in the first forum they see and count on either somebody giving them an answer and/or a moderator moving it to the right location.
On the other hand, I can certainly understand the aesthetics of not having this forum at the top.
Given that it's just a link (rather than an actual forum), I'm inclined to suggest trying it to see how it looks in practice, and (more importantly) to see if it helps.
Please stop reorganzing them. Pick some organization strategy and leave it in place.
I absolutely, whole-heartedly, completely agree. This needs to be the final re-org done for quite a while. (with maybe the exception of very little tweaks, such as moving something from "other worlds" up to the main section or adding a link to the Related Links section
I don't look at Roles, I see Fighter or Wizard. The Roles are a design aid, and a look into what went into the making of the class. It isn't something the players need to look at after the character is made.
The other thing is that the GSL information were hidden within the other threads for a while before the new section was put up about a month ago. The previous edition (3rd) was given a section that seems tacked on, or shoved out of the way somehow.
The Gleemax mix was off putting and mixed up everything until you got back into the wizards section.
I like this new direction that Solice has in store. I hope that she can get it done soon.
I absolutely, whole-heartedly, completely agree. This needs to be the final re-org done for quite a while. (with maybe the exception of very little tweaks, such as moving something from "other worlds" up to the main section or adding a link to the Related Links section
Well,I think theres gonna be atleast one more re-org if not a major one next year when D20 moder ngets its reboot,but then thats gonna be more of giving back the D20 area to modern rather than naming it RPGs....
The rest of the reorganization sounds fine to me.
I don't follow you. Stuff will still be in separate threads. The only way a player could get a spoiler is by clicking on the thread -- which they can do right now.
The way I'm reading the proposal, "Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion" appears to be a single forum as currently proposed. The slash reads like an "and/or" to me.
If I should be reading this as "Dragon Article Discussions forum and a separate Dungeon Article Discussions forum" then that's fine. Just separating those onto two different lines would help clarity though.
If you move House Rules & Homebrew into the Fundamentals section it would get more traffic, as well as have less Homebrew stuff put up in the other forums. As it is Homebrew gets put in Fundamentals anyway... A lot of people simply post their stuff in the related Fundamentals board.
If it were placed ahead of the other forums it would hopefully get the majorituy of homebrew stuff. Then from there it could "sift" down to related forums... If needed.
It's just a thought.
IF you moved it to only the fundamentals section then you might as well remove all older edition forums. The problem is that 4th edition is 4th edition. Fan creation are not 4th edition.
Homebrew/houserules/previous edition stuff is pretty much now all fan creations as they are no longer supported except for minor space allowed on the forums for them.
You don't expect to see non-official stuff in the 4E fundamentals section....though you probably will in home-made classes or races, that SHOULD belong in the homebrew/whatever section.
Also since dragon and Dungeon are now all official material, then any submission of a homebrew would make it official and no longer homebrew.....
I think homebrew should be outside of fundamentals and fundamentals should remain as core as possible for any newcomers to the game to find a haven for being able to find information on things directly form the books, rather than other peoples inventions.
The "role" forums should be left as is.
No they should not!
First off, I want to thank everyone for their feedback and comments, they are extremely valuable.
I took everyone's ideas, suggestions and concerns, and presented them to folks on the R&D team along with my own recommendations. We've come up with the following plan:
We split Character Building into 5 forums:
Character Building: Defenders
Character Building: Strikers
Character Building: Leaders
Character Building: Controllers
Character Building: Hybrids
We hope to have this put in place tomorrow.
Thanks,
-Mike
If the R&D are NOT posting on the forums, they have no say what the organization should be. I opposed anything that keeps the forums split by role,s because the initial reasoning behind it.
R&D make the books and can decide for them, but players don't sit around talking about their characters, my striker did this, my striker did that....It is more like my elf paladin did this, my elf paladin did that.
The design concepts need to be left for designing the game and not prime topic or separations thereof for discussions.
How often do you sit around and talk about strikers? I bet you spend more time talking about rangers or warlocks, or rogues than just strikers.
The design concepts need to be left for designing the game and not prime topic or separations thereof for discussions.
How often do you sit around and talk about strikers? I bet you spend more time talking about rangers or warlocks, or rogues than just strikers.
Are you saying the subforums should be:
-Rogues, Warlocks and Rangers
-Fighters and Paladins
-Warlords and Clerics
-Wizards
Or are you saying they should be organized in a different manner?
I don't see the point of "Find Players" as a top forum.
It is a link to another forum. It would probably fit best under GD or in Community Business...
GRRR! Kistra
I ain't even on this page for reading yet.... I mentioned the best way to split IF needed was by power sources, but was just saying in actual discussion you don't go hearing people talk about strikers and defenders when they are talking about their characters.
I wouldn't say "Hey check out my new striker!"
I would say "Hey check out my new elf ranger!"
The way I'm reading the proposal, "Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion" appears to be a single forum as currently proposed. The slash reads like an "and/or" to me.
If I should be reading this as "Dragon Article Discussions forum and a separate Dungeon Article Discussions forum" then that's fine. Just separating those onto two different lines would help clarity though.
Nope. That forum will be a single forum for both magazines. The activity in each forum, on their own, is on the order of a dozen new threads a month.
Pro-Merger (at least until it is shown to be unweildy)
- Vaalingrade Ashland (#11)
- Lord Karsus (#14)
- wrecan (#28)
- Leichenreiter (#29)
- Zherog (#32)
- Webster (#85)
- hellmute (#215)
- kistra (#230)
- Belorin (#262)
- Mesinock (#295)
- Malckuss (#300)
- LFK (#301)
- Katherose (#309)
- thaX (#317)
Can I have my seating change on this list, I don't like who I am sitting next to. 
Just to make sure this is for people who think 2 forums are enough for classes right?
One major forum with all classes, and spillover from multiclassing gets into a forum with the paths and destinies, etc as well as other multiclassing feats and whatnot, correct?
I am for most anything so long at it does not divide the classes by "roles".
I absolutely, whole-heartedly, completely agree. This needs to be the final re-org done for quite a while. (with maybe the exception of very little tweaks, such as moving something from "other worlds" up to the main section or adding a link to the Related Links section
Then we need to take time and do it right unlike the week being given by Solice that was the same week given by Mike to end up where we are now.
Like people say about product delays vs mass product errors.
Take a bit extra time and get it done right the first time!
Regardless, I believe the original reason for the split of the classes board was overwhelming traffic there. I'd say merge them back in, as I expect traffic to drop off as people get used to the setting over the next few months to year.
I use them when organizing games (I don't care if I get a Warlord, Cleric, or Artificer - I just want a Leader, don't care if it's Arcane, Martial or Holy), and even the Game Table Online will be supporting filling seats by Role.
I'd also like to point out that, IMHO, classes share more in common with other classes inside their role than they do based on their power source. IE - A Warlord has more in common with Clerics and Artificers (Leaders) than he does with Rogues, Rangers, Fighters (Martial powered classes*).
Dividing by classes, I fear, would lead to forum bloat, with the constant addition of new classes in Dragon, and as new sourcebooks are released. Additonaly, many separate class forums would see spikes in traffic when classes are new, and would slowly linger and "die on the vine" as once-new classes age and are replaced by other newer models.
Then again, I'm just one more yahoo with an opinion. Take of it what you will.
Yahoo!
*I reserve the right to change my opinon after the release of the Martial Power/Divine Power, though I find it unlikely I'll do so.
Regardless, I believe the original reason for the split of the classes board was overwhelming traffic there. I'd say merge them back in, as I expect traffic to drop off as people get used to the setting over the next few months to year.
You can believe what you want to but the fact remains R&D decided how to split the class forums. It had nothing to do with "traffic" and this traffic **** needs to end.
A few others have mentioned that it is poorly placed and that other forums invite these posts. Since we're trying to make each re-org final (I hope) that means we may as well address as many concerns as possible.
Please put House Rules/Homebrew in 4e Fundamentals so that people see it when they click on D&D. If necessary, add in a Previous Editions version. Or just let people post their Previous Editions creations in the relevant category (classes, monsters, items, etc) since those forums could use a little more traffic. They aren't that busy and will probably lose more people than they gain over time.
I'd also like to throw in my vote for *not* consolidating the Character Building forums into one. Yes, half of the posts in each are Rules Q&A, House Rules, or Char Op material. However, the majority of D&D folks are players, not DMs, so they'll be thrilled to go to one place and see a lot of threads related to their PC. Using the search function is *really* inefficient unless we develop some new tags and people start using them. If four forums (we don't need Hybrid, since it is almost all House Rules stuff) clog up the look of things, then make them subforums. Two clicks is still easy, and people can always bookmark. One forum per class or per power source will get ugly fast, and one forum for all will be bloated.
Another possible (quick and dirty) fix is placing a sticky in each forum that gets lots of homebrew traffic directing people to the correct forum.
I like spending time in the House Rules forum because I like seeing what people's creative energies produce, and I also like to help people balance out their homebrew stuff so that it doesn't end up being too powerful (or in a select few cases, not powerful enough). This is why I'd like to see all those posts go to the correct place; as it is, I end up mostly helping people who post their stuff in the correct spot, and not helping people who don't, which isn't fair to them (yes, I consider my advice that crucial, :P :P :P ).
I'm ambivalent about merging the Roles forums or not. Arguments on both sides of the issue are pretty good.
Hybrid definitely needs to disappear though, or be renamed so that it's obviously not for homebrew stuff.
It is true that roles are a game design construct, and that players will rarely refer to their PC as "my striker" or "my leader", but I'd bet good money that no one refers to their PC as "my arcane character" or "my divine character" either ("my primal character"?
yesh...).Classes just seem to have more in common if grouped by role than they do if grouped by power source.
Pro-Merger (at least until it is shown to be unweildy)
- Vaalingrade Ashland (#11)
- Lord Karsus (#14)
- wrecan (#28)
- Leichenreiter (#29)
- Zherog (#32)
- Webster (#85)
- hellmute (#215)
- kistra (#230)
- Belorin (#262)
- Mesinock (#295)
- Malckuss (#300)
- LFK (#301)
- Katherose (#309)
- thaX (#317)
Anti-Merger
- Ultimatecalibur (#205)
- Sebby (#216)
- mudbunny (#222)
- Lucas Longthorn (#304)
- Cohen95 (#305)
- Armisael (#311)
- Skalgrimm (#312)
- Dragonsblood (#313)
- Migi (#319)
- Fox Reeveheart (#320)
- Direach (#328)
- Harliquinn (#329)
- Wolfstar76 (#338)
- emwasick (#340)
You're looking at it backwards. Rules Q&A is for rules questions that don't belong in the other forums. Go to the specific forum before going to the general forum.
Then I suggest these forums have "Rules Questions" in their names
@Hellmute: I would rather have each individual forum but one be a safe-haven for new players then have lots of forums with a little homebrew content.
@squarecircle: Funny, because I've been doing similar things (with less advice) in the Character Building forums.
wrecan, can you do a poll for HR&HB in or out of D&DF?
I like the layout except the Dragon and Dungeon combination.
Dragon is aimed at all. Dungeon is aimed at DMs only.
I believe:
- Dungeon should be a sub-forum of What's a DM to Do? and
- Dragon can be left where it is currently (in DDI) or
- Dragon can be dissolved with the articles discussed topically on the rest of the Boards.
Okay, the running tally, if I have it correct.... (keeping in mind that this isn't up for a vote. Solice will decide what she thinks best for the forums):
Pro-Merger (at least until it is shown to be unweildy)
- Vaalingrade Ashland (#11)
- Lord Karsus (#14)
- wrecan (#28)
- Leichenreiter (#29)
- Zherog (#32)
- Webster (#85)
- hellmute (#215)
- kistra (#230)
- Belorin (#262)
- Mesinock (#295)
- Malckuss (#300)
- LFK (#301)
- Katherose (#309)
- thaX (#317)
Anti-Merger
- Ultimatecalibur (#205)
- Sebby (#216)
- mudbunny (#222)
- Lucas Longthorn (#304)
- Cohen95 (#305)
- Armisael (#311)
- Skalgrimm (#312)
- Dragonsblood (#313)
- Migi (#319)
- Fox Reeveheart (#320)
- Direach (#328)
- Harliquinn (#329)
- Wolfstar76 (#338)
- emwasick (#340)
You can add me to the pro-merger list. Even if that forum ends up being fast, the current state of things is ugly.
I lied. I am making my proposal a day early. ;)
See notes at the end of the post for questions, thoughts and a request.
D&D Headquarters
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Future Releases
- Related Topics (links to the section below)
- GSL
- VCL Open Discussion (link)
4e D&D Fundamentals
- FIND PLAYERS IN YOUR AREA HERE!
- 4e General Discussion
- 4e Classes and Powers
- 4e Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- 4e Races and Monsters
- 4e Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
- 4e Abilities, Powers, Skills and Feats
- 4e Combat: Traps, Terrain and Tactics
- 4e Character Optimization
- 4e Character Development
- 4e Rules Q&A
D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules & Homebrew
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
- D&Di General
- D&Di Announcements
- Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion
- Technical Discussion
- Digital D&D
D&D Worlds[INDENT]
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: General
- Eberron: Eberron Lore
- Eberron: Running Eberron
- Other Published Worlds
[/INDENT]
- Birthright
- Council of Wyrms
- Darksun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
D&D Previous Editions
- Previous Editions General
- Monsters and Races
- Classes and Class Features
- Equipment, Skills, and Feats
- Spells, Invocations, Psionics, and Magic Items
- Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
- Previous Editions Rules Q&A
RPGs
- RPGs General Discussion
- d20 Modern
- d20 General
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
Related Topics
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
- RPG Gamer Classifieds
- The Marketplace
- Star Wars RPG
- Gaming Culture
- Creative Corner
I suggest that the "Homebrew" part of "House Rules & Homebrew" be merged with 4E Classes, 4E Races and 4E Monster forum (that is, 4E Races and Monsters get split up).
My reasoning for this is that races and monsters each will generate numerous discussions and consolidating them will result in a cluttered forum.
My reasoning for Homebrew becoming part of all the other forums is to relieve pressure, and because, as you've all seen, people use them to post their creations anyways. People tend to want specific rather than general, and "class" is more specific than "homebrew," not to mention that "House Rules & Homebrew" are way further down the forum than "Classes" is.
A "House Rules" forum could deal with more general homebrewing, such as expanded combat mechanics or alternate skill systems.
I suggest that the "Homebrew" part of "House Rules & Homebrew" be merged with 4E Classes, 4E Races and 4E Monster forum (that is, 4E Races and Monsters get split up).
My reasoning for this is that races and monsters each will generate numerous discussions and consolidating them will result in a cluttered forum.
My reasoning for Homebrew becoming part of all the other forums is to relieve pressure, and because, as you've all seen, people use them to post their creations anyways. People tend to want specific rather than general, and "class" is more specific than "homebrew," not to mention that "House Rules & Homebrew" are way further down the forum than "Classes" is.
A "House Rules" forum could deal with more general homebrewing, such as expanded combat mechanics or alternate skill systems.
I disagree, I think a Homebrew forum should be kept separate, to avoid too much clutter in other forums. When people visit Monsters, Races, Classes, whatever, they typically don't go there for Homebrew material, but that's where other people place it.
If you try to suggest that House Rules be for more "general homebrewing" it won't change anything. It'll still be used the way it is now, for "general" homebrewing as well as classes, races, feats, etc.
I think it's best to just have all that stuff in one spot. That's partly why I think it might be a good idea to move House Rules and Hombrew up to Fundamentals, or at least have stickies in the various forums that get "homebrew spam" directing people to the correct forum for that stuff, and ENFORCE it.
Also, I do agree with SC about a Homebrew forum. If you're changing part of the core mechanic, that's not really a class, power, feat or similar. Also, I think there should be a place to post all your changes in one place (rather than class changes in the class forum, race changes in the race forum, etc.)
EDIT: I do think that it should be in the "Fundamentals" section only because I see that section as having a general "creation" theme. Really it should trade places with the Q+A forum.
I disagree, I think a Homebrew forum should be kept separate, to avoid too much clutter in other forums. When people visit Monsters, Races, Classes, whatever, they typically don't go there for Homebrew material, but that's where other people place it.
If you try to suggest that House Rules be for more "general homebrewing" it won't change anything. It'll still be used the way it is now, for "general" homebrewing as well as classes, races, feats, etc.
I think it's best to just have all that stuff in one spot. That's partly why I think it might be a good idea to move House Rules and Hombrew up to Fundamentals, or at least have stickies in the various forums that get "homebrew spam" directing people to the correct forum for that stuff, and ENFORCE it.
What I think will happen then is little-to-medium traffic in the Classes, Races and Monsters forums and OMGHORRIBLEFLOOD in the Homebrew forum. I don't think you realize how much stuff people actually create themselves.
Also, I don't think Homebrew-notHomebrew is a good way to split the forums.
Also also, imagine how much less work it would take if instead of redirecting people and moving threads to the right forum, they made this one the right forum. /appeal to laziness
I disagree, I think a Homebrew forum should be kept separate, to avoid too much clutter in other forums. When people visit Monsters, Races, Classes, whatever, they typically don't go there for Homebrew material, but that's where other people place it.
I'm only one person, but when the primary forums were for 3.5, I absolutely went to the Spells and Magic forum to get homebrewed spells, and to the Monster's Lair to get homebrewed critters. *shrug*
I'm only one person, but when the primary forums were for 3.5, I absolutely went to the Spells and Magic forum to get homebrewed spells, and to the Monster's Lair to get homebrewed critters. *shrug*
So have I for my de facto 3.25 years here. Maybe it's just a habit, but I want it acknowledged, damn it!
What I think will happen then is little-to-medium traffic in the Classes, Races and Monsters forums and OMGHORRIBLEFLOOD in the Homebrew forum. I don't think you realize how much stuff people actually create themselves.
Based on my review of the threads, I'm not concerned. There's plenty of traffic in the Character Building forums unrelated to homebrewing.
I like perusing the House Rules forum for new ideas. I don't like flipping through every other forum in the boards for it.
Then I suggest these forums have "Rules Questions" in their names
Oh, God no. Bad enough we had to include "Character Building" on every freakin' class forum. The description for Rules Q&A should make clear that it's a place to ask rules-based questions that don't fit anywhere else.
wrecan, can you do a poll for HR&HB in or out of D&DF?
Not really. I don't have that much free time.
Pro-Merger (at least until it is shown to be unweildy)
- Vaalingrade Ashland (#11)
- Lord Karsus (#14)
- wrecan (#28)
- Leichenreiter (#29)
- Zherog (#32)
- Webster (#85)
- hellmute (#215)
- kistra (#230)
- Belorin (#262)
- Mesinock (#295)
- Malckuss (#300)
- LFK (#301)
- Katherose (#309)
- thaX (#317)
- thecasualoblivion (#346)
- Crashy75 (#349)
Anti-Merger
- Ultimatecalibur (#205)
- Sebby (#216)
- mudbunny (#222)
- Lucas Longthorn (#304)
- Cohen95 (#305)
- Armisael (#311)
- Skalgrimm (#312)
- Dragonsblood (#313)
- Migi (#319)
- Fox Reeveheart (#320)
- Direach (#328)
- Harliquinn (#329)
- Wolfstar76 (#338)
- emwasick (#340)
For the record, I'm pro-merger. I'm also pro-Awesome-Dude's-votes-count-twice.
If the Character Building forums are split into sub-forums, here's one more argument in favor of a separation by roles:
It is true that roles are a game design construct, and that players will rarely refer to their PC as "my striker" or "my leader", but I'd bet good money that no one refers to their PC as "my arcane character" or "my divine character" either ("my primal character"?
Classes just seem to have more in common if grouped by role than they do if grouped by power source.
Part of the reason I don't think they should be segmented is looking at the current state of things. The Role forums are fairly slow moving and a lot of character creation stuff is getting dumped in Hybrid, CharDev, and CharOp because 1) people want exposure for their threads and 2) the Role organized forums aren't appropriate to a general discussion about something like stat distribution or alternate point buys or Fighter vs Rogue. I think the Role division makes conceptual sense in the "how do we divide stuff up with this edition?" but I personally don't find it very convenient, interesting to read, or good looking.
Something else I do want to bring up is that Fundamentals and Community don't really belong in different cubicles.
Honestly moving Houserules and Homebrew up into Fundamentals, at the very least, would take a huge load off the Classes, Races, and so on everything forums as those are what contribute a significant amount of glut when the forums are combined.
How popular was Council of Wyrms? When I created The Piazza, that was (and so far still is) the only one of those settinsg to not only not get a request for a specific forum, but to not even get a post about it in my other worlds forum. I'm not sure about the need for it just yet, unless WotC has plans for it I'm not privy to.
Council of Wyrms was taken off of Solice's most recent list. It wasn't that popular...but I love it, darnit...isn't that enough? ;)
You are splitting up the Eberron board into two? Me liek. Me liek this lots.
You are splitting up the Other Worlds? EXCELLENT! We can has Al-Qadim and Karatur boards too?
-Joni
Indeed, how are the worlds getting unmushed or un-Other Worlded, i.e., how is it determined? (Hope I didn't miss the answer somewhere.) Or more to the point, why no Rokugan??
Does each of the worlds proposed so far really need its own space?Love the ideas for the Fundamentals section! And the idea for a sticky directory or condensed forum map somewhere.
Pro-Merger (at least until it is shown to be unweildy)
- Vaalingrade Ashland (#11)
- Lord Karsus (#14)
- wrecan (#28)
- Leichenreiter (#29)
- Zherog (#32)
- Webster (#85)
- hellmute (#215)
- kistra (#230)
- Belorin (#262)
- Mesinock (#295)
- Malckuss (#300)
- LFK (#301)
- Katherose (#309)
- thaX (#317)
- thecasualoblivion (#346)
- Crashy75 (#349)
- Awesome Dude (#356)
- Obsidianjaerc (#358)
- Marius4 (#361)
- mvincent (#379)
- Toki_Wartooth (#389)
Anti-Merger
- Ultimatecalibur (#205)
- Sebby (#216)
- mudbunny (#222)
- Lucas Longthorn (#304)
- Cohen95 (#305)
- Armisael (#311)
- Skalgrimm (#312)
- Dragonsblood (#313)
- Migi (#319)
- Fox Reeveheart (#320)
- Direach (#328)
- Harliquinn (#329)
- Wolfstar76 (#338)
- emwasick (#340)
- Penhall (#378)
- Fenian (#382)
I'm only one person, but when the primary forums were for 3.5, I absolutely went to the Spells and Magic forum to get homebrewed spells, and to the Monster's Lair to get homebrewed critters. *shrug*
What about general rule changes/alterations? (point buy, a stunt sub-system, etc.)
Indeed, how are the worlds getting unmushed or un-Other Worlded, i.e., how is it determined? (Hope I didn't miss the answer somewhere.) Or more to the point, why no Rokugan??
I think that it makes the most sense to simply undo the merger and give a separate forum to each world that previously had a separate forum.
There are bound to be settings that people love that won't get forums of their own, and it's not a reflection on the setting or on the fans. But you raise a good point: was there an Oriental Adventures sub-forum before the merger? Should there be one now? (And should it be limited to Rokugan, or should it include Kara-Tur (or does that belong in the FR forums)?)
Does each of the worlds proposed so far really need its own space?
I've argued this point repeatedly, as wrecan and Lord Karsus can attest. Rather than repeat those arguments, I'd suggest that you search for posts from me. Or, you can check out these:
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1071759
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1034666&page=2
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=924893
What about general rule changes/alterations? (point buy, a stunt sub-system, etc.)
I never looked for those things. ;)
If I were going to, they could've been found in D&D General or the equivalent of the House Rules and Homebrew forum.
I never looked for those things. ;)
If I were going to, they could've been found in D&D General or the equivalent of the House Rules and Homebrew forum.
The House Rules and Homebrew is correct, but also in "What's a DM to Do?" .
This is probably not quite what you are talking about, but what if we just had one subforum where you post threads that you don't know where to post. Then the mods visit it every once in a while and move the threads to the proper forums. That way we don't have the silly "this thread moved" things taking up space in the real subforums, and people will be learning where their threads should go in a more systematized fashion. It also provides a place for people to have a random sampler of what's going on in the entire community.
lol,not even close...I was talking about places like the D&D off topic tavern not helping CM's goals of bringing the community closer. And if people wish that it stay,then i insist that every forum gets it own off topic place..Stars Wars,RPG etc...
I'm would be very pleased to see the role-based organization of the forums go away, in favor of a class-based organization. In my ideal world, we would have a forum for "4e classes" and a separate sub-forum under that for each published class.
However, if we can't have a separate sub-forum for each published class, that's ok too.
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Future Releases
- Related Topics (links to the section below)
- GSL
- VCL Open Discussion (link)
4e D&D Fundamentals
- FIND PLAYERS IN YOUR AREA HERE!
- 4e Classes and Powers
- 4e Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- 4e Races and Monsters
- 4e Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
- 4e Abilities, Skills and Feats
- 4e Combat: Traps, Terrain and Tactics
- 4e Character Optimization
- 4e Character Development
- 4e Rules Q&A
- 4e General Discussion
D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules & Homebrew
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
- D&Di Announcements
- Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion
- Dragon/Dungeon General
- Technical Discussion
- Digital D&D
- D&Di General
D&D Worlds
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: General
- Living Forgotten Realms
- Eberron: Eberron Lore
- Eberron: Running Eberron
- Other Published Worlds
- Birthright
- Dark sun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Oriental Adventures
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
D&D Previous Editions
- Monsters and Races
- Classes and Class Features
- Equipment, Skills, and Feats
- Spells, Invocations, and Magic Items
- Psionics
- Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
- Previous Editions Rules Q&A
- Previous Editions General
RPGs
- d20 Modern
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
- RPGs General Discussion
Related Topics
- RPGA
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
- RPG Gamer Classifieds
- The Marketplace
- Star Wars RPG
- Gaming Culture
- Creative Corner
- The Rec Room
Please note:
The 4e classes and powers forum will very likely need to be split out reasonably soon so I want to continue our discussion on this topic. We will merge them for the time being and watch the activity to see what our next move should be. Until then, we can continue to discuss the different approaches to splitting this forum up.
I am starting a new thread for this continued discussion so we can keep the conversation focused.
There was also discussion amongst some in the community to take a look at how we want our forum descriptions to read. If people have specific thoughts on a forum’s description they would like to have considered, please create a new thread for that discussion.
This will make it far easier for me to go through and gather your feedback for consideration!
Thank you all again for your continued feedback and investment in the community!
We are currently scheduled to do this reorg on Monday, September 15th.
D&D Worlds
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: General
- Eberron: Eberron Lore
- Eberron: Running Eberron
One last request for a Living Forgotten Realms link here.
(I may strike out, but I'm going down swinging).Borrowing from the current format, I'd propose:
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: General
- [shortcut] Forgotten Realms: Living Campaign (RPGA)
- Eberron: Eberron Lore
- Eberron: Running Eberron
Related Topics
- RPGA
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
- RPG Gamer Classifieds
- The Marketplace
- Star Wars RPG
- Gaming Culture
- Creative Corner
- The Rec Room
Thanks for the RPGA link here. I think that fits better than what I was looking for originally in/near the Find a player section.
I updated the list to include both requests.
(Missed those somehow, sorry!)
DOH!
I updated the list to include both requests.
(Missed those somehow, sorry!)
Thank ya.
It'll mean somebody has to spend the time to go through the forum and make a list of threads that need moved and then post that list in the [thread=988683]D&D and D&D 4e Forum Lead Suggestions[/thread] thread.
I would assume threads can be moved around upon request once the re-org is completed. But that's just a hunch.
It'll mean somebody has to spend the time to go through the forum and make a list of threads that need moved and then post that list in the [thread=988683]D&D and D&D 4e Forum Lead Suggestions[/thread] thread.
This is correct, I asked the same question in hopes of a simple sollution.
Silly me. ;)
That said, I think making them subforums under a classes forum is a decent compromise. I'd also love to see the descriptive text make specific mention of class names, to make it clear.
But past experience in 3.5 proves that's just not the case, Tony. The Classes forum wasn't too crowded.
That said, I think making them subforums under a classes forum is a decent compromise. I'd also love to see the descriptive text make specific mention of class names, to make it clear.
The only trouble with mentioning class names is by the time all the power sources are done there will be at minimum 32 classes divided between the 4 roles.
Bel
D&D Headquarters
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Future Releases
- Related Topics (links to the section below)
- GSL
- VCL Open Discussion (link)
4e D&D Fundamentals
- FIND PLAYERS IN YOUR AREA HERE!
- 4e Classes and Powers
- 4e Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- 4e Races and Monsters
- 4e Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
- 4e Abilities, Skills and Feats
- 4e Combat: Traps, Terrain and Tactics
- 4e Character Optimization
- 4e Character Development
- 4e Rules Q&A
- 4e General Discussion
D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules & Homebrew
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
- D&Di Announcements
- Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion
- Dragon/Dungeon General
- Technical Discussion
- Digital D&D
- D&Di General
D&D Worlds[INDENT]
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
- Forgotten Realms: General
- Living Forgotten Realms
- Eberron: Eberron Lore
- Eberron: Running Eberron
- Other Published Worlds
[/INDENT]
- Birthright
- Dark sun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Oriental Adventures
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
D&D Previous Editions
- Monsters and Races
- Classes and Class Features
- Equipment, Skills, and Feats
- Spells, Invocations, and Magic Items
- Psionics
- Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
- Previous Editions Rules Q&A
- Previous Editions General
RPGs
- d20 Modern
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
- RPGs General Discussion
Related Topics
- RPGA
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
- RPG Gamer Classifieds
- The Marketplace
- Star Wars RPG
- Gaming Culture
- Creative Corner
- The Rec Room
Please note:
The 4e classes and powers forum will very likely need to be split out reasonably soon so I want to continue our discussion on this topic. We will merge them for the time being and watch the activity to see what our next move should be. Until then, we can continue to discuss the different approaches to splitting this forum up.
I am starting a new thread for this continued discussion so we can keep the conversation focused.
There was also discussion amongst some in the community to take a look at how we want our forum descriptions to read. If people have specific thoughts on a forum’s description they would like to have considered, please create a new thread for that discussion.
This will make it far easier for me to go through and gather your feedback for consideration!
Thank you all again for your continued feedback and investment in the community!
We are currently scheduled to do this reorg on Monday, September 15th.
I like it. I still think Rituals should be with feats and skills and 4e D&D Fundamentals should have it's own house rules section but those are minor.
here is the current evolved structure. (Forgive my poor format skills, I am working on a lap top in a cafe. You get the idea though!)D&D Headquarters
Community Business
WotC Staff Blogs
Future Releases
GSL
Related Topics (links to the section below)
VCL Open Discussion (link)
4e D&D Fundamentals
4e General Discussion
Description: Can’t find what you’re looking for in one of our forums below? Come on in and pull up a seat! Welcome to General Discussion!
4e Rules Q&A
FIND PLAYERS IN YOUR AREA HERE! Description: Looking for a gaming group in your area? Start here!
Controllers: Building Wizards
Description: Controllers deal with large numbers of enemies at one time, favoring offense over defense and powers that weaken, confuse, or delay their foes.
Defenders: Building Fighters and Paladins
Description: Defenders are the party's front-line combatants, with the highest defense and close-up offense.
Leaders: Building Clerics and Warlords
Description: Leaders inspire, heal, and aid their group. They have good defenses, and focus on protecting their companions and targeting specific foes for the party to focus on.
Strikers: Building Rangers, Rogues, and Warlocks
Description: Strikers deal high amounts of damage on a single target at once. They rely on superior mobility, trickery, or magic to move around tough foes and single out their targets.
4e Abilities, Skills and Feats
4e Character Optimization
4e Character Development
4e Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
4e Races and Monsters
4e Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
4e Combat: Traps, Terrain and Tactics
D&D Community
What's a DM to Do?
What's a Player to Do?
House Rules & Homebrew
Campaign & Adventure Workshop
Astrid's Parlor
Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Insider
D& D&Di General
DDi Announcements
Dragon/Dungeon General
Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion
Technical Discussion
Digital D&D
D&D Worlds
Forgotten Realms: General
Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
Living Forgotten Realms
Eberron: Eberron Lore
Eberron: Running Eberron
Other Published Worlds
Birthright
Dark sun
Dragonlance
Greyhawk
Mystara
Oriental Adventures
Planescape
Ravenloft
Spelljammer
Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
D&D Previous Editions
Previous Editions General
Monsters and Races
Classes and Class Features
Equipment, Skills, and Feats
Spells, Invocations, and Magic Items
Psionics
Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
Previous Editions Rules Q&A
RPGs
RPGs General Discussion
d20 Modern
d20 Character Optimization
d20 Character Development
Related Topics
RPGA
D&D Fiction
Play by Post Forums
RPG Gamer Classifieds
The Marketplace
Star Wars RPG
Gaming Culture
Creative Corner
The Rec Room
Though there are some new players that have wanted to keep the roles split on the classes, [...]
Not only new players.
Not only new players.
Yeah I had a Red Box and IMHO split the classes by role is the best way.
- a single character build forum would be way too spammy
- character build forum per class would be overkill
Thus you must divide them. By role is the best way since it is future proof for when new classes are introduced.
If we insist on splitting the classes forum by role, just name it after the role and be done with it.
I would also like to recommend a sub-forum structure to classes.
- 4e Classes
- Controllers
- Defenders
- Leaders
- Strikers
- Multiclassing, Paragon Paths, and Epic Destinies
- Controllers
Now, instead of five forums showing on the main list, there's one. It should still be really clear what goes in there, and once you're in the Classes forum looking at the list, the subforum descriptions can go and list what the role does and the current classes that fill that role.
-In lieu of roles, would it make sense to use things like, "Magic Users", "Fighters", etc.?
All I can see coming from dividing things like that is an ugly mess. Think about it. What determines which classes go in what forum? Do the Swordmage and Paladin go in the "Fighters" forum? or do they go in the "Magic Users" and "Priests" forums respectively? A division like that would provoke a lot of crossposting and make it generally difficult to find the right place to put a thread.-And, "hybrid" can be a used as a category. ;)
-Again, I'm just discussing this as (A) a single character board is probably not a good idea, and, (B) Not playing MMORPGs, or 4e, I am not familiar with the existing terms, save vague guesses, which makes determining where threads that need to be moved harder for me.
-Understood, but, at the same time, when additional classes are created in future books, the hastle of adding new subsections/descriptions/etc. is avoided, as they simply fit into the broad categories.
-And, "hybrid" can be a used as a category. ;)
-Again, I'm just discussing this as (A) a single character board is probably not a good idea, and, (B) Not playing MMORPGs, or 4e, I am not familiar with the existing terms, save vague guesses, which makes determining where threads that need to be moved harder for me.
Yes, but that's why it's been proposed that the class names be enumerated in each sub-forum description.
I don't know why Solice has not incorporated this in her latest proposal.
Yes, but that's why it's been proposed that the class names be enumerated in each sub-forum description.
I don't know why Solice has not incorporated this in her latest proposal.
What about post #420?
By role, with class names enumerated, seems like an acceptable compromise to me. (The compromise being between facilitating building by combat role first or building by class & characterization first.) Listing the classes doesn't seem like too much to me.
By role, with NO class names, is waaaay too far in one direction.
-Again, I'm just discussing this as (A) a single character board is probably not a good idea, and, (B) Not playing MMORPGs, or 4e, I am not familiar with the existing terms, save vague guesses, which makes determining where threads that need to be moved harder for me.
So you sort of need a simple 4e role primer?
Personally, that wouldn't bother me at all :P, cause I don't really care too much about the roles except as afterthought. But I'm guessing perhaps that's why that option is not popular with y'all?
Anyway, again, just reiterating that I think it's important to find a compromise rather than go all one way or the other; the latter just doesn't seem necessary to accomplish a smooth organization of some sort here. I think I like the layout for classes in post #420.
Edit: Oh, should all of this be over on the Classes organization thread?
Based on the feedback I am hearing and throwing in my own
[INDENT]
- D&D Headquarters
- Community Business
- WotC Staff Blogs
- Future Releases
- GSL
- Related Topics (links to the section below)
- VCL Open Discussion (link)
- Community Business
- 4e D&D Fundamentals
- 4e General Discussion
Description: Can’t find what you’re looking for in one of our forums below? Come on in and pull up a seat! Welcome to General Discussion! - 4e Rules Q&A
- FIND PLAYERS IN YOUR AREA HERE!
Description: Looking for a gaming group in your area? Start here! - Controllers: Building Wizards
Description: Controllers deal with large numbers of enemies at one time, favoring offense over defense and powers that weaken, confuse, or delay their foes. - Defenders: Building Fighters and Paladins
Description: Defenders are the party's front-line combatants, with the highest defense and close-up offense. - Leaders: Building Clerics and Warlords
Description: Leaders inspire, heal, and aid their group. They have good defenses, and focus on protecting their companions and targeting specific foes for the party to focus on. - Strikers: Building Rangers, Rogues, and Warlocks
Description: Strikers deal high amounts of damage on a single target at once. They rely on superior mobility, trickery, or magic to move around tough foes and single out their targets. - 4e Abilities, Skills and Feats
- 4e Character Optimization
- 4e Character Development
- 4e Multiclassing, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- 4e Races and Monsters
- 4e Rituals, Equipment and Magic Items
- 4e Combat: Traps, Terrain and Tactics
- 4e General Discussion
- D&D Community
- What's a DM to Do?
- What's a Player to Do?
- House Rules & Homebrew
- Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- Off-Topic Tavern
- What's a DM to Do?
- D&D Insider
- D& D&Di General
- DDi Announcements
- Dragon/Dungeon General
- Dragon/Dungeon Article Discussion
- Technical Discussion
- Digital D&D
- D& D&Di General
- D&D Worlds
- Forgotten Realms: General
- Forgotten Realms: Realmslore
- Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms
- Living Forgotten Realms
- Eberron: Eberron Lore
- Eberron: Running Eberron
- Other Published Worlds
- Birthright
- Dark sun
- Dragonlance
- Greyhawk
- Mystara
- Oriental Adventures
- Planescape
- Ravenloft
- Spelljammer
- Other Worlds (including 3rd Party)
- Forgotten Realms: General
- D&D Previous Editions
- Previous Editions General
- Monsters and Races
- Classes and Class Features
- Equipment, Skills, and Feats
- Spells, Invocations, and Magic Items
- Psionics
- Adventures, Campaigns, and Encounters
- Previous Editions Rules Q&A
- Previous Editions General
- RPGs
- RPGs General Discussion
- d20 Modern
- d20 Character Optimization
- d20 Character Development
- RPGs General Discussion
- Related Topics
- RPGA
- D&D Fiction
- Play by Post Forums
- RPG Gamer Classifieds
- The Marketplace
- Star Wars RPG
- Gaming Culture
- Creative Corner
- The Rec Room
- RPGA
(end of Solice's post)
My questions to Solice:
- What happened with the idea of putting the class forums as sub-forums under a 4e Classes & Powers forum?
- What happened to the idea of having, as one of these sub-forums, a Multiclassing & Cross-Role Class Topics forum for threads that don't fit in just one class sub-forum?
- Why put the class names in the forum names? That will get unwieldy fast.
- Why not enumerate the class names in each sub-forum description instead of the role descriptions? The role descriptions are not as useful as the class names for sorting out traffic.
- See [post=16815387]this post[/post] for a proposal on how this might look.
Hmm...I'm sincerely curious. Does going by power source seem like way too far in the other direction to those of you favoring roles? Then all the roles would be jumbled together according character flavor (arcane, divine, etc.).
To me it's weirder than roles. The power source is just a keyword with some flavor and no mechanical differences. As the CB discussions are already about mechanics, I just feel roles are a better divider.
Personally, that wouldn't bother me at all :P, cause I don't really care too much about the roles except as afterthought. But I'm guessing perhaps that's why that option is not popular with y'all?
I'd say it's difficult to get used to for some because it's too "gamey". I can understand that but at the same time, it's just a name convention for what has existed for a long time now.
Anyway, again, just reiterating that I think it's important to find a compromise rather than go all one way or the other; the latter just doesn't seem necessary to accomplish a smooth organization of some sort here. I think I like the layout for classes in post #420.
Edit: Oh, should all of this be over on the Classes organization thread?
Indeed.
That's a bad call. You're going to be moving/closing threads left and right.
- Controllers: Building Wizards
Description: Controllers deal with large numbers of enemies at one time, favoring offense over defense and powers that weaken, confuse, or delay their foes.- Defenders: Building Fighters and Paladins
Description: Defenders are the party's front-line combatants, with the highest defense and close-up offense.- Leaders: Building Clerics and Warlords
Description: Leaders inspire, heal, and aid their group. They have good defenses, and focus on protecting their companions and targeting specific foes for the party to focus on.- Strikers: Building Rangers, Rogues, and Warlocks
Description: Strikers deal high amounts of damage on a single target at once. They rely on superior mobility, trickery, or magic to move around tough foes and single out their targets.
Merge.
- 4e Races and Monsters
Split.
- House Rules & Homebrew
Split and merge (Homebrew should be everywhere and House Rules a separate forum).
Anything else will only bring ruin to these boards. RUIN I SAY!
-Since the Living Forgotten Realms link is going to be put in the Forgotten Realms "area", might as well put a link to the Living Eberron section as well, for the sake of balance.
There is no Living Eberron RPGA campaign.
The most recent Eberron campaign (Xen'Drik Expeditions) is no longer in production and will stop being offered for play at the end of the year.
I don't oppose a link to Xen'Drik Expeditions, but due to the database issues with the DCI/RPGA merge, many players lost lots of character data (levels and gold) which combined with the campaign being mostly over has lead to very little traffic.
In short, I wouldn't say "no" to a link to Xen'Drik Expeditions, but it will be a forum to be retired in a few month's time.
When (if?) there's a new Eberron Campaign announced, I will, of course, request a link from below the Eberron forums to this new forum. At this time there's nothing to link to.
-Also, the Forgotten Realms: General section does not have a description. This should be tacked on there:
Share your opinions on Forgotten Realms products, take part in community projects involving the Forgotten Realms, and ask general queries about the setting as a whole, here. Posts that do not meet the criteria of being placed in Forgotten Realms: Realmslore, or Forgotten Realms: Running the Realms belong here.
Glad to see races rescued from the class mess and put where it belongs though.