I'm a former long-term forumer who left a while ago because I didn't like the direction Mearls was taking the game with Essentials. I haven't posted in a long time, but I still stop by now and then to read the articles and see where 5e might be heading. I just wanted to express some dissatisfaction.
I left because I didn't like the direction things were headed. A lot of other people didn't like the direction either, and many of them probably stopped hanging around too. I just want to make sure that Mearls, and now Cook, and the rest of the designers and market researchers, don't forget that there are people who did like D&D, and who could be 5e customers, who aren't participating in this web site anymore. All of these new polls about what 5e should be like worry me because it looks like Mearls is essentially doing market research on an echo chamber.
When 3e came out, it alienated some 2e folks, when 3.5e came out, it alienated some 3e folks, when 4e came out, it alienated quite a lot of 3.5e folks, and when 4.E came out, it alienated a bunch of 4.0 folks. The people who are left regularly participating on this site are people who were happy with the shift from 3 to 3.5 to 4.0 to 4.E to the future. In short, they are the people who stood by every change D&D made and are happy with Mearls's recent changes and the decision to start going retro. Setting up a bunch of polls asking if these people like everything Mearls wants to do and then getting back a "yes" does not mean that these ideas for 5e are actually good ideas. It means you've narrowed down your fans to Mearls fans. The polls are also incredibly "leading", they follow an article all about how Mearls or Monte thinks that something from 3e/4e sucks, and how a very vague and not thought out idea might somehow be better, and then ask "So which is better, the new awesome thing, or the crappy terrible thing that I will phrase in such a way that most people won't choose it?"
So I just want to make sure my voice is heard, and make sure WotC remembers that there are people who actually LIKED 4e who could be your 5e customers, and there were people who actually LIKED 3.5 and moved to Pathfinder who could also be your 5e customers, and that it's a bad idea to put two people who hate 3e and 4e in charge of 5e, and believing that questionably worded polls show that "the majority" agree with them that 1e was the only good edition and that everything from the last twenty years needs to be scrapped.
Retro is bad. Unbalanced is bad. Making all the rules flimsy and unusable on purpose to allow "DM freedom" to try and rule on the fly is bad. System Mastery is bad. "Rules hurt roleplay so we're allowed to make **** rules that everyone will ignore" is bad. "It doesn't matter that my designs are unbalanced and won't work in an actual gameplay setting, because they're REALISTIC and FREE and FLAVORFUL" is bad. "Magic and items and powers and classes and monsters shouldn't be held to strict formulas, we should be free to write whatever numbers we want and the DM should figure out how to balance it on his own" is bad. Pretty much everything I've read in L&L is bad, bad, bad.
If you look at the poll numbers though, everyone seems to be totally on board with turning 5e into 1e. The forums will be full of people rabidly defending every column and every idea that gets posted by the designers. Please, PLEASE, just remember that these people aren't the only ones out there. Float these ideas in front of Pathfinder fans, in front of people who don't like Essentials, in front of people who stuck with 3.5 or 3.0, in front of younger kids who like WoW, and lots of other groups. All of them could be 5e customers if you do it right. If you stay insular and only bounce these ideas off a bunch of 1e grognards, of course it will seem like you've found the ultimate design to 5e. PLEASE tell me that you have designers out there trying these ideas on people who aren't already 100% predisposed to agree with everything the designers are going to say.
Thanks, and see you in a few months when I'm next filled with nerd rage. ;)
-makeshiftwings
i think 4th sucked, gave it like 3 campaigns of effort, and swore it off til they busted out the essentials stuff. it's still not very good, but tolerable enough to hang out with my gaming group.
i've liked the ideas behind most L&L columns, if not the specific suggested implementation that at least the concept (the idea of this statement to disprove the thesis of your post that only grognards and people that like everything post here with a quick example to the contrary, because arguing your post on a point by point basis will do nothing for either you or me)
"System Mastery is bad."
4th is a pile of system mastery on the player end so I don't know what you mean by this.
You say you stop in every now and then to check things out. I doubt that. If you actually did, you would see just as many people posting their concerns and criticisms as there are agreeing with the staus quo. Claiming that the forum members who chose to not flee for greener pastures are simply brainless slaves to whims of the might WotC and will buy whatever is passed in front of them is...well...a boastful claim, to say the least, and downright wrong to boot. Check any given thread that discusses the direction Cook plans to take things. You will see your own words mirrored back in spades. Many of us are concerned about the future direction of the game, but perhaps feel it is better to stay here and stay abreast of the situations as they unfold rather than tuck tail and run, effectively sticking our heads in the sand whenever anyone mentions a "new direction" for the game we all love.
I just want to make sure that Mearls, and now Cook, and the rest of the designers and market researchers, don't forget
I don't believe you. I remember you, makeshiftwings, and I know that you know that the best way to get a message to the developers is through Customer Service. These forums, and "General" Discussion in particular isn't designed for communicating to the designers. It's designed for communicating with the community, the folks you decry as an "echo chamber". But you know this.
Please people, don't rise to the bait. Let the thread just die.
don't rise to the bait. Let the thread just die.
+1
I just can't read through that and not point out that many of the people in this forum are not just those who liked the change from 3.5 to 4 to 4.1, but a lot of the people here are new players brought in by the changes in the game.
I like where the game has gone in 4e, I like the new DM books like Monster Vault 1 and 2, the Neverwinter champaign book and Mordenkainen’s Magnificent Emporium, I think we are getting some of the best the game has to offer...
From what I can tell what you want from the game is very ridgid rules. Great, you don't have to rule on the fly, L&L is talking about ideas and concepts to think about, its like D&D philosiphy not market research. And while you might think both responces in their questions are leading, Im sure if I went over to the World of Darkness sites and looked at their ideas of good gaming Id dislike my options there as well. Not saying its bad, just not for me.
If you are so dead set against the change, when Mearls and Cook ring your door bell to take away your books, don't answer and hide under your bed. Keep playing the game you love and be happy for it. You are never made to change your game because of a web page.
Im just so frustraded by posts like this. No game can please everyone, for everyone of you there is one of me, someone who picks and choses what I like from the large array of D&D offerings and thinks the game has only gotten better since I first picked up a D&D book in late 2007.
And again sorry Wrecan
Love how grognards assume [...]
What is your definition of grognard such that you feel comfortable asserting that they all make this assumption?
Love how grognards assume [...]
What is your definition of grognard such that you feel comfortable asserting that they all make this assumption?
My definition of "grognard" is "person who irrationally feels that previous version X of anything (RPGs, Music, Interpretive Dance, etc) is better than any version that has come out subsiquently, and anyone who feels otherwise is an idiot, because only the grognard's opinion is valid, end of discussion."
Is there a more specific definition when dealing with RPG grognards? I didn't mean to offend anybody who prefers old editions in a rational manner.
Surely you don't mean to invalidate the original poster's opinion.
Yup.
In short, they are the people who stood by every change D&D made and are happy with Mearls's recent changes and the decision to start going retro. Setting up a bunch of polls asking if these people like everything Mearls wants to do and then getting back a "yes" does not mean that these ideas for 5e are actually good ideas. It means you've narrowed down your fans to Mearls fans.
I suppose there could be something to that. I was thinking they'd just resorted to outright falsifying the poll results. That last one, where Cook demonstrated blatant unfamiliarity with 4e, then suggested a 'new' idea that wasn't new at all, and didn't make much sense, /and/ was told so in no uncertain terms on the forums (and other forums) and comments section, and still got big aproval on the poll? That just rang false.
Retro is bad. Unbalanced is bad. Making all the rules flimsy and unusable on purpose to allow "DM freedom" to try and rule on the fly is bad. System Mastery is bad. "Rules hurt roleplay so we're allowed to make **** rules that everyone will ignore" is bad. "It doesn't matter that my designs are unbalanced and won't work in an actual gameplay setting, because they're REALISTIC and FREE and FLAVORFUL" is bad. "Magic and items and powers and classes and monsters shouldn't be held to strict formulas, we should be free to write whatever numbers we want and the DM should figure out how to balance it on his own" is bad. Pretty much everything I've read in L&L is bad, bad, bad.
You exagerate... slightly.
Biggest mistake WotC made though was dropping the ball on the VT imo.
- I was a fan of the previous edition
- I'm not a fan of the current edition
I don't like the direction this edition took
I'm not part of the current fanbase - Please don't forget to expand your fanbase with the new edition.
(for example, taking a direction that people who play previous editions like)
To that, let me say:
There's a difference between maintaining the current fanbase (as opposite to losing your current fanbase), and expanding your fanbase (as opposite to no new fans).
Polls on the WotC website and stuff, are to maintain the current fanbase, not to expand the fanbase.
1. I don't like the direction the game is going in, yet I still read the forums alot and ocasionally post. Not everyone who is unhappy with the direction of the game has left.
2. Nothing is stoping you from playing a 2nd, 3rd, 3.5 or non essential 4e game with your friends. Nothing at all. The books are out there and the content is still available. Not two weeks ago my friends and I started played a 2nd edition campaign. All you need are some friends who want to do that. If you hate essentials, set up a game where no one can use essential characters. Dislike some of the eratas? ignore them. Think some feats are game breaking? Ban them. Whenever my friend DMs a campaign he always bans Changelings and Bugbears and lets players pick any other race. Why? because he thinks they are game breaking.
3. They are still making content for non essential classes. Sure, not nearly as often, but its still comming out.
4. If you don't like the new material don't buy it. I havn't purchased a single essential product. Thats my way of complaining. Sales are going to control the direction of the game.
5. There really is room for everyone. Just find people who want to play the same style campaign that you do.
An edition war thread is being born before our eyes. Just stop.
(let it die please, this thread is a waste of electrons)
> suggested a 'new' idea that wasn't new at all, and didn't make much sense,
> /and/ was told so in no uncertain terms on the forums (and other forums) and
> comments section, and still got big aproval on the poll?
I have a feeling that a fair number of Pathfinder folks followed him there and voted in favor because he was pitching it.
Mind you, I'm also coming to suspect that many of those L&L columns are meant to speak to old-E fans (rather than current 4E players) and the columns are thus written assuming that they don't know how 4E works.
My definition of "grognard" is "person who irrationally feels that previous version X of anything (RPGs, Music, Interpretive Dance, etc) is better than any version that has come out subsiquently, and anyone who feels otherwise is an idiot, because only the grognard's opinion is valid, end of discussion."
I disagree with defining the term in a manner that makes it inherently an insult.
Is there a more specific definition when dealing with RPG grognards? I didn't mean to offend anybody who prefers old editions in a rational manner.
I consider a grognard anyone who remembers older editions of a game with fondness. Such a definition has no relation to an assessment of current versions of the game. By this definition:
- Some grognards do not like the current edition (the OP?).
- Some grognards love the current edition (including myself).
My definition of "grognard" is "person who irrationally feels that previous version X of anything (RPGs, Music, Interpretive Dance, etc) is better than any version that has come out subsiquently, and anyone who feels otherwise is an idiot, because only the grognard's opinion is valid, end of discussion."
I disagree with defining the term in a manner that makes it inherently an insult.Is there a more specific definition when dealing with RPG grognards? I didn't mean to offend anybody who prefers old editions in a rational manner.
I consider a grognard anyone who remembers older editions of a game with fondness. Such a definition has no relation to an assessment of current versions of the game. By this definition:
- Some grognards do not like the current edition (the OP?).
- Some grognards love the current edition (including myself).
Interesting. I had always inferred that it meant "the complainers," which is kind of what the original french word means: an old grumbling soldier.
I'll refrain from using in that manner in the future.
Dear Wizards:
I have been a D&D player since I was a child and I have always enjoyed it. I’ve kept up with the changes from edition to edition despite my frequent grousing about such changes. I think with Fourth Edition you’ve hit a sweet spot in game design and I really enjoy it, but I fear that the Essentials line has really caused you to hit a snag. It’s vast and sweeping rules changes are too broad for me to ignore, and I feel you unnecessarily compel me to incorporate the totally optional rule changes in Essentials into my existing campaign. I cannot handle the slight changes to the power system and thinking about one class having two roles gives me a migraine. While Essentials is only about a year old, I can already tell that you are committed to continued publication and that you intend to knock into the mud any player that may want to continue playing the Fourth Edition I’ve known and loved for the last few years.
I know you are just trying to expand the player base and give current players more options, but I can’t abide by that. If you want my money, I insist that you go back to cooking up semi-annual splat books featuring semi-useless feats until you paint yourself into a design corner from which D&D will never escape. I know that’s asking a lot, but that’s the price of my continued support of your products. Just to show you how far I am willing to go, I will refuse to use the Character Builder despite how much easier it makes building characters. My lack of login and the transfer of my consumer dollars away from you to Ticonderoga Pencils will be the ultimate demonstrate of my resolve.
Please, WotC, stop innovating. Please stop trying to take any sort of risk or attempting to push the envelope in game design. I feel as though I am constantly being pushed out of my safe place and it is no longer socially acceptable for me to carry my security blanket at all times. I am afraid of the direction D&D is taking, but I am equally paralyzed by the notion of trying another system. As such, my only option is to fire volleys of forum posts at you in the hopes that you will listen and stop with all the creative changes you have made.
All I desire is more of the same mother’s milk you’ve provided for the last few years and I do not want to be weaned off with different fare.
Dear Wizards:
I have been a D&D player since I was a child and I have always enjoyed it. I’ve kept up with the changes from edition to edition despite my frequent grousing about such changes. I think with Fourth Edition you’ve hit a sweet spot in game design and I really enjoy it, but I fear that the Essentials line has really caused you to hit a snag. It’s vast and sweeping rules changes are too broad for me to ignore, and I feel you unnecessarily compel me to incorporate the totally optional rule changes in Essentials into my existing campaign. I cannot handle the slight changes to the power system and thinking about one class having two roles gives me a migraine. While Essentials is only about a year old, I can already tell that you are committed to continued publication and that you intend to knock into the mud any player that may want to continue playing the Fourth Edition I’ve known and loved for the last few years.
I know you are just trying to expand the player base and give current players more options, but I can’t abide by that. If you want my money, I insist that you go back to cooking up semi-annual splat books featuring semi-useless feats until you paint yourself into a design corner from which D&D will never escape. I know that’s asking a lot, but that’s the price of my continued support of your products. Just to show you how far I am willing to go, I will refuse to use the Character Builder despite how much easier it makes building characters. My lack of login and the transfer of my consumer dollars away from you to Ticonderoga Pencils will be the ultimate demonstrate of my resolve.
Please, WotC, stop innovating. Please stop trying to take any sort of risk or attempting to push the envelope in game design. I feel as though I am constantly being pushed out of my safe place and it is no longer socially acceptable for me to carry my security blanket at all times. I am afraid of the direction D&D is taking, but I am equally paralyzed by the notion of trying another system. As such, my only option is to fire volleys of forum posts at you in the hopes that you will listen and stop with all the creative changes you have made.
All I desire is more of the same mother’s milk you’ve provided for the last few years and I do not want to be weaned off with different fare.
Spread your wings and fly, little eagle, spread your wings and fly!
To make matters worse, much of what 4th edition did well has been squandered or misused. It's a horrible lack of direction that doesnt even support the core product in what it does best.
I just want to second some of makeshiftwings' initial statement. As some one who has recently come back to these forums (and is already thinking about walking away), I feel that this forum environment is VERY critical to anyone who is not a hardcore fan of 4e. The statement about the echo chamber rings true to me.
I would also like to know what is a realistic way to communicate to wizards about concerns for future development. Someone mentioned customer service. Seriously? That is the way wizards want us to message to the designers? I find that hard to believe, but if someone has actual experience with that being effective, I would love to hear about it.
The direction going forward doesnt really have much choice. It has to call back many of those who have been lost and it has to patch up a community that is badly fragmented. Paizo has managed to form a whole company that competes on equal terms in sales, purely from those left behind and their creative energy.
To make matters worse, much of what 4th edition did well has been squandered or misused. It's a horrible lack of direction that doesnt even support the core product in what it does best.
What Paizo does really well is support their product line and publish regularly. I do NOT like the pathfinder system, but I am drawn to their products just based on the consistency of quality and support. With wizards, you feel that they are thrashing about looking for some kind of magic formula/product that is going to be the next big thing. It reminds me of the way TV shows are now developed, where if it is not an instant sensation, it is abandoned. I also think that they must be pouring a lot of money into VTT, and this is hurting their bread and butter product lines.
As some one who has recently come back to these forums (and is already thinking about walking away), I feel that this forum environment is VERY critical to anyone who is not a hardcore fan of 4e.
Yep.
As some one who has recently come back to these forums (and is already thinking about walking away), I feel that this forum environment is VERY critical to anyone who is not a hardcore fan of 4e.
Yep.
It's not very critical to "anyone" who is not a hardcore fan of 4e. There are people with well-formed, legitimate reasons disliking a wide variety of aspects of 4e. I myself have been highly critical of the Essentials design philosophy, and have never hid it. I've gotten into reasoned, meaningful debates with people who disagreed, but I never felt beat up about it.
Who the forum is harsh to, however, are the people who come in saying "I don't like 4e" and then list incomplete, inaccurate, and oversimplified reasons why. As people with more knowledge of the system and what it does and does not do well, the forum denizens rightly criticize complaints that aren't backed by what the system actually does. And then the complainer gets all mad, typically, because they don't feel like they're being heard - when in reality they were heard, they were told they weren't seeing the system from the fullest possible perspective.
I just want to second some of makeshiftwings' initial statement. As some one who has recently come back to these forums (and is already thinking about walking away), I feel that this forum environment is VERY critical to anyone who is not a hardcore fan of 4e. The statement about the echo chamber rings true to me.
It's the result of years of people coming here talking crap about 4e, it put people on edge. It's basically assumed that if someone joins with less then 50 posts and starts saying that 4e is bad, that he's trolling and/or hating on 4e. That's just how it goes.
I would also like to know what is a realistic way to communicate to wizards about concerns for future development. Someone mentioned customer service. Seriously? That is the way wizards want us to message to the designers? I find that hard to believe, but if someone has actual experience with that being effective, I would love to hear about it.
Generally speaking the last thing you want as a major company is to have people mailing your designers. After all, those people have a job to do and they don't want a million mails from people who think they know better or just hate the system they built every day.
So yeah, customer service or the forum is probably your best bet, and even then you might not be heard. That's how it goes.
As some one who has recently come back to these forums (and is already thinking about walking away), I feel that this forum environment is VERY critical to anyone who is not a hardcore fan of 4e.
Yep.
I disagree, it's not that unfriendly - take a look at the thread about the person asking if they should stick with 3.5 or go to 4e, it's a very civil thread. The difference between that thread and some of the other ones is that the OP isn't making accusations about 4e that are not true.
On the other hand, when people make threads basically saying that 4e doesn't offer anything in the way of roleplaying, which is just a bold face lie, people are going to correct it because the person is flat out wrong.
Also, people tend to get better reception on these boards when they don't point fingers at people and insult them when that person provides some constructive critisim in a very polite manner.
As some one who has recently come back to these forums (and is already thinking about walking away), I feel that this forum environment is VERY critical to anyone who is not a hardcore fan of 4e.
Yep.
It's not very critical to "anyone" who is not a hardcore fan of 4e. There are people with well-formed, legitimate reasons disliking a wide variety of aspects of 4e. I myself have been highly critical of the Essentials design philosophy, and have never hid it. I've gotten into reasoned, meaningful debates with people who disagreed, but I never felt beat up about it.
Who the forum is harsh to, however, are the people who come in saying "I don't like 4e" and then list incomplete, inaccurate, and oversimplified reasons why. As people with more knowledge of the system and what it does and does not do well, the forum denizens rightly criticize complaints that aren't backed by what the system actually does. And then the complainer gets all mad, typically, because they don't feel like they're being heard - when in reality they were heard, they were told they weren't seeing the system from the fullest possible perspective.
And I can't think of any threads that started out like that.
Same crap, different thread with petty, whiny 3tards spewing their crap rather than just playing the game they do like because everything should cater to them.
I feel that this forum environment is VERY critical to anyone who is not a hardcore fan of 4e.
I believe your opening return post and that of the OP belie this claim.
These forums are very critical of anyone who wants to walk in from the cold, drop a load of craptalk on 4e, and then call it constructive. Your post managed to mix quite a bit of the good in with the bad, making it seem like it was not a craptalk, but it was a generally unwise approach to your first comments out of the gate.
This community is quite capable of engaging in constructive criticism. But nobody with criticism, constructive or destructive, is going to receive a glowing fullagreement response because regardless of what you are criticizing (constructively or not), a sizable and active portion of the Forum-using player base likes it.
- Some are blind sycophants of all things WotC has made and will make.
- Some are enthusiastic fanboys that like the current version of D&D more than anything.
- But most are content 4e players who have only a few aspects of the game they could without and choose to spend their time focusing on the majority of the game that they like.
Translated OP: Dear Designers and Marketers: Your game sucks because I like an old one better. You're utter failures unless you make a new edition that caters to me rather than those who like your game.
Same crap, different thread with petty, whiny 3tards spewing their crap rather than just playing the game they do like because everything should cater to them.
This is a perfect example of the hostility I mentioned earlier. I know the media of boards fosters this for various reason, but seriously, this is just bizarre to me. 4e is a game system. It's not your child. I got back on the forums to be part of a community and instead people are either really condescending or just out-right hostile.
Translated OP: Dear Designers and Marketers: Your game sucks because I like an old one better. You're utter failures unless you make a new edition that caters to me rather than those who like your game.
Same crap, different thread with petty, whiny 3tards spewing their crap rather than just playing the game they do like because everything should cater to them.This is a perfect example of the hostility I mentioned earlier. I know the media of boards fosters this for various reason, but seriously, this is just bizarre to me. 4e is a game system. It's not your child. I got back on the forums to be part of a community and instead people are either really condescending or just out-right hostile.
... Didn't you call someone who disagreed with you an Apologist a while back in a thread you created because he offered you some advice/mildly disagreed with you? And wouldn't that be considered both condescending AND out-right hostile.
Just saying....
I feel that this forum environment is VERY critical to anyone who is not a hardcore fan of 4e.
I believe your opening return post and that of the OP belie this claim.
These forums are very critical of anyone who wants to walk in from the cold, drop a load of craptalk on 4e, and then call it constructive. Your post managed to mix quite a bit of the good in with the bad, making it seem like it was not a craptalk, but it was a generally unwise approach to your first comments out of the gate.
This community is quite capable of engaging in constructive criticism. But nobody with criticism, constructive or destructive, is going to receive a glowing fullagreement response because regardless of what you are criticizing (constructively or not), a sizable and active portion of the Forum-using player base likes it.
- Some are blind sycophants of all things WotC has made and will make.
- Some are enthusiastic fanboys that like the current version of D&D more than anything.
- But most are content 4e players who have only a few aspects of the game they could without and choose to spend their time focusing on the majority of the game that they like.
I kind of got into the forums because it seems that 5th edition is coming down the line and I was worried that all the GOOD stuff in 4th was going to get ejected by a design team that wanted to capture the pathfinder market share. So I find the hostility especially ironic. I have no emotional attachment to any game system (beyond some occasional nostalgic fondness). This seems like the kind of fan-boy psychology that I associate with sports teams.
Translated OP: Dear Designers and Marketers: Your game sucks because I like an old one better. You're utter failures unless you make a new edition that caters to me rather than those who like your game.
Same crap, different thread with petty, whiny 3tards spewing their crap rather than just playing the game they do like because everything should cater to them.This is a perfect example of the hostility I mentioned earlier. I know the media of boards fosters this for various reason, but seriously, this is just bizarre to me. 4e is a game system. It's not your child. I got back on the forums to be part of a community and instead people are either really condescending or just out-right hostile.
... Didn't you call someone who disagreed with you an Apologist a while back in a thread you created because he offered you some advice/mildly disagreed with you? And wouldn't that be considered both condescending AND out-right hostile.
Just saying....
And I DID mention that I was guilty myself. HOWEVER here is a BIG difference between calling someone an apologist (which is no deadly insult by any stretch of the imagination) and calling them a “3tard.” I can call someone an apologist in a civil debate because it is not what I would consider a personal insult. I am not disparaging their character or personality or lineage.
And I DID mention that I was guilty myself. HOWEVER here is a BIG difference between calling someone an apologist (which is no deadly insult by any stretch of the imagination) and calling them a “3tard.” I can call someone an apologist in a civil debate because it is not what I would consider a personal insult. I am not disparaging their character or personality or lineage.
So, because YOU don't consider it an insult, that makes it not so? How about the rest of your response to me that basically implies that I am inexperienced (because you have 40 years of knowledge) and that you must have better data than I that proves my disagreement void?
You sound like a complete WOTC apologist. I have been roleplaying for 40 years. I play in two 4th edition campaigns. I know a ton of gamers. The consensus of nearly all the people I talk to is that D&D 4th edition is the least roleplaying-friendly system around.
Nevermind that after people disagreed with you, you basically told everyone what they were posting was wrong and that you wanted to have a discussion on the strenghts and weakness of the system withought anyone being alowed to contradict you on why what you put in as a weakness isn't actually a weakness
Wow. I want a discussion, but about the topic. Not how to roleplay better or DM better. I want a discussion about the stengths and weakness of the system. Another post had a very different list than mine. I thought that was great.
Translated OP: Dear Designers and Marketers: Your game sucks because I like an old one better. You're utter failures unless you make a new edition that caters to me rather than those who like your game.
Same crap, different thread with petty, whiny 3tards spewing their crap rather than just playing the game they do like because everything should cater to them.This is a perfect example of the hostility I mentioned earlier. I know the media of boards fosters this for various reason, but seriously, this is just bizarre to me. 4e is a game system. It's not your child. I got back on the forums to be part of a community and instead people are either really condescending or just out-right hostile.
... Didn't you call someone who disagreed with you an Apologist a while back in a thread you created because he offered you some advice/mildly disagreed with you? And wouldn't that be considered both condescending AND out-right hostile.
Just saying....And I DID mention that I was guilty myself. HOWEVER here is a BIG difference between calling someone an apologist (which is no deadly insult by any stretch of the imagination) and calling them a “3tard.” I can call someone an apologist in a civil debate because it is not what I would consider a personal insult. I am not disparaging their character or personality or lineage.
It's good to know that you decide what is civil and what isn't on a does-this-offend-me-and-only-me basis. Heart warming really. I'm sorry am I being offensive to you? Well to me I'm not so therefore I'm not being offensive to anyone. Wheeeee!
Translated OP: Dear Designers and Marketers: Your game sucks because I like an old one better. You're utter failures unless you make a new edition that caters to me rather than those who like your game.
Same crap, different thread with petty, whiny 3tards spewing their crap rather than just playing the game they do like because everything should cater to them.This is a perfect example of the hostility I mentioned earlier. I know the media of boards fosters this for various reason, but seriously, this is just bizarre to me. 4e is a game system. It's not your child. I got back on the forums to be part of a community and instead people are either really condescending or just out-right hostile.
If someone comes to a forum for a certain, well, anything and starts talking crap about it then playing the victim card when called on it then they deserve anything they get and more. It isn't civility to be a jerk and then run behind a protective entity be it a moderator, mother, teacher or bunker crying 'he was mean to me'.
Posts, threads and forums can be polite so long as the initial instigators don't instigate. The OP was simply an instigation. The designers made a game a large number of people really enjoy but some don't. For those who enjoyed other versions there are actually places/people supporting their likes too. Enjoy that.
Different people have disliked every version of D&D for some reason or another, some times even for cover art on the books changing. 4E also brings in a lot of new players and lapsed players. But it can't please everyone. Hopefully most people have a version of the game available they do like regardless of which version it is and can be happy others enjoy whichever cersion thay like.
I'm certainly am not a WoTC / 4e appologist. I'm just trying to play the most recent and supported edition of D&D the way I always have.
When people dump on 4e they are mostly just very upset that they can't seem to play the same way they always have. It really takes a lot of effort to adapt to 4e to an old school play style. When people drop by the fourms and make a post slaming 4e they are just venting their frustation. I for one, didn't realize that 4e had changed so much. I don't think anyone really did unless they were following the design team around. Many people really didn't expect things to change in the way that they did. There are even those who consider 4e not be D&D anymore.
Now I can't say I like the current direction of 4e, but I'm hoping for some changes and at least they are starting to realize were they went wrong. I hope they continue to look at the past, present, and future of D&D. The worst thing they can do is alienate all the new fans they gained and continue to ignore all their old player base.
I actually like many of the things the OP posts as bad, and I hope 5e does go that way. But ultimately, what might work best is a core rules book, followed by second - more complicated/realistic/simulation - "optional" rules book. Then they could better satisfy both ends of the gaming spectrum.
Interesting idea. The "optional" rule book could be named Advanced Dungeons & Dragons.
I actually like many of the things the OP posts as bad, and I hope 5e does go that way. But ultimately, what might work best is a core rules book, followed by second - more complicated/realistic/simulation - "optional" rules book. Then they could better satisfy both ends of the gaming spectrum.
Interesting idea. The "optional" rule book could be named Advanced Dungeons & Dragons.
Or just Unearthed Arcana
Translated OP: Dear Designers and Marketers: Your game sucks because I like an old one better. You're utter failures unless you make a new edition that caters to me rather than those who like your game.
Same crap, different thread with petty, whiny 3tards spewing their crap rather than just playing the game they do like because everything should cater to them.This is a perfect example of the hostility I mentioned earlier. I know the media of boards fosters this for various reason, but seriously, this is just bizarre to me. 4e is a game system. It's not your child. I got back on the forums to be part of a community and instead people are either really condescending or just out-right hostile.
If someone comes to a forum for a certain, well, anything and starts talking crap about it then playing the victim card when called on it then they deserve anything they get and more. It isn't civility to be a jerk and then run behind a protective entity be it a moderator, mother, teacher or bunker crying 'he was mean to me'.
Posts, threads and forums can be polite so long as the initial instigators don't instigate. The OP was simply an instigation. The designers made a game a large number of people really enjoy but some don't. For those who enjoyed other versions there are actually places/people supporting their likes too. Enjoy that.
Different people have disliked every version of D&D for some reason or another, some times even for cover art on the books changing. 4E also brings in a lot of new players and lapsed players. But it can't please everyone. Hopefully most people have a version of the game available they do like regardless of which version it is and can be happy others enjoy whichever cersion thay like.
There is no justification for calling someone a 'petty, whiny 3tard' and accusing him of 'spewing crap'. You've now further inferred that he is a jerk. Based on your picture, you appear to be an adult - perhaps it's time to start acting like one.
Translated OP: Dear Designers and Marketers: Your game sucks because I like an old one better. You're utter failures unless you make a new edition that caters to me rather than those who like your game.
Same crap, different thread with petty, whiny 3tards spewing their crap rather than just playing the game they do like because everything should cater to them.This is a perfect example of the hostility I mentioned earlier. I know the media of boards fosters this for various reason, but seriously, this is just bizarre to me. 4e is a game system. It's not your child. I got back on the forums to be part of a community and instead people are either really condescending or just out-right hostile.
If someone comes to a forum for a certain, well, anything and starts talking crap about it then playing the victim card when called on it then they deserve anything they get and more. It isn't civility to be a jerk and then run behind a protective entity be it a moderator, mother, teacher or bunker crying 'he was mean to me'.
Posts, threads and forums can be polite so long as the initial instigators don't instigate. The OP was simply an instigation. The designers made a game a large number of people really enjoy but some don't. For those who enjoyed other versions there are actually places/people supporting their likes too. Enjoy that.
Different people have disliked every version of D&D for some reason or another, some times even for cover art on the books changing. 4E also brings in a lot of new players and lapsed players. But it can't please everyone. Hopefully most people have a version of the game available they do like regardless of which version it is and can be happy others enjoy whichever cersion thay like.
This will probably be my last post. I have to get back to the real world, but I just re-read the OP, and NOTHING you are saying about it is accurate. The OP made some good points, and he/she was not whining at all, nor is the OP playing the victim card, etc. I am very disappointed with the attitude that I am observing here among many of the forum members. I think the forums should be about expressing opinions.
The idea that the OP is instigating something is based on the concept that critiquing WOTC or 4e or the designers is an instigation. It is not. How could it be? Forum members are taking these statements as personal insults. The concept is alien to me. We are talking about games here. Some people like scrabble other people like blockus, but they don’t get into personal arguments about it. I know RPs are more intense, but what I am observing makes me wonder about the whole enterprise.
The OP is right. Maybe not for you, but for him he is right. His feelings about what WOTC are legitimate. He is a disgruntled customer. And he feels WOTC is ignoring him. So they are losing a customer. They have been losing a lot, I suspect. It’s bad business on their part.
The OP cares enough about the game to get on the boards, make an effort to write something and take the abuse. I commend him. What did Voltaire say? I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Like I said this will be my last post for a bit -- I have realized that the only winning move is not to play.
Dear Wizards:
I have been a D&D player since I was a child and I have always enjoyed it. I’ve kept up with the changes from edition to edition despite my frequent grousing about such changes. I think with Fourth Edition you’ve hit a sweet spot in game design and I really enjoy it, but I fear that the Essentials line has really caused you to hit a snag. It’s vast and sweeping rules changes are too broad for me to ignore, and I feel you unnecessarily compel me to incorporate the totally optional rule changes in Essentials into my existing campaign. I cannot handle the slight changes to the power system and thinking about one class having two roles gives me a migraine. While Essentials is only about a year old, I can already tell that you are committed to continued publication and that you intend to knock into the mud any player that may want to continue playing the Fourth Edition I’ve known and loved for the last few years.
I know you are just trying to expand the player base and give current players more options, but I can’t abide by that. If you want my money, I insist that you go back to cooking up semi-annual splat books featuring semi-useless feats until you paint yourself into a design corner from which D&D will never escape. I know that’s asking a lot, but that’s the price of my continued support of your products. Just to show you how far I am willing to go, I will refuse to use the Character Builder despite how much easier it makes building characters. My lack of login and the transfer of my consumer dollars away from you to Ticonderoga Pencils will be the ultimate demonstrate of my resolve.
Please, WotC, stop innovating. Please stop trying to take any sort of risk or attempting to push the envelope in game design. I feel as though I am constantly being pushed out of my safe place and it is no longer socially acceptable for me to carry my security blanket at all times. I am afraid of the direction D&D is taking, but I am equally paralyzed by the notion of trying another system. As such, my only option is to fire volleys of forum posts at you in the hopes that you will listen and stop with all the creative changes you have made.
All I desire is more of the same mother’s milk you’ve provided for the last few years and I do not want to be weaned off with different fare.
10/10, the part about the security blanket being especially noteworthy
But when his perceptions and feelings are based on incorrect and inaccurate information, it's not "rude" to point that out.
If his perceptions and feelings are based on incorrect and inaccurate information, then of course it's not rude to point it out. It might even be polite and helpful. But an adult should be able to do that without resorting to name-calling. In fact they're obliged to under the terms of these boards.
People should be able to voice their opinions here without being shouted down in a volley of ad hominem attacks. Us geeks are supposed to be the smart ones, remember?
For the record, I don't think the tone of the OP was entirely admirable either, but you can choose to lower the tone further or you can choose to present a calm, rational counter-argument.
I kind of got into the forums because it seems that 5th edition is coming down the line and I was worried that all the GOOD stuff in 4th was going to get ejected by a design team that wanted to capture the pathfinder market share.
That's a legitimate concern. The recent direction has been decidedly backwards.
And all I see those days is a LOT of bitter fans of older editions comiung here to vent.
Why should we have to stand this and take the 'sermons'? Why is saying 'you are wrong and not contrsuctive' bad, when it is true?
If you do not like this edition, why just accept this, and play YOUR edition? If you don't buy books, its already WHAT IS REALLY needed to send YOUR message.
This forum is really foolish lax. TRY doing the same to Pathfinder on their forums. I DARE YOU.
There is constructive criticism,. and there is bitter trashing.
And all I see those days is a LOT of bitter fans of older editions comiung here to vent.
Why should we have to stand this and take the 'sermons'? Why is saying 'you are wrong and not contrsuctive' bad, when it is true?
If you do not like this edition, why just accept this, and play YOUR edition? If you don't buy books, its already WHAT IS REALLY needed to send YOUR message.
This forum is really foolish lax. TRY doing the same to Pathfinder on their forums. I DARE YOU.
The so called "bitter" fans of older that come here are probably bitter because they have tried 4th edition and didn't like it so they voice their opinion and they have every right to.
You see D&D is not going to stop at 4th edition so people who don't really like the game can voice their concerns and hope the next edition is more to their liking.
The recent direction has been decidedly backwards.
I personally like the new direction especially the decision to not be limited by power source (such an arbitary restriction). Definitely visionary and forward thinking.
There is constructive criticism,. and there is bitter trashing.
And all I see those days is a LOT of bitter fans of older editions comiung here to vent.
Why should we have to stand this and take the 'sermons'? Why is saying 'you are wrong and not contrsuctive' bad, when it is true?
If you do not like this edition, why just accept this, and play YOUR edition? If you don't buy books, its already WHAT IS REALLY needed to send YOUR message.
This forum is really foolish lax. TRY doing the same to Pathfinder on their forums. I DARE YOU.
The so called "bitter" fans of older that come here are probably bitter because they have tried 4th edition and didn't like it so they voice their opinion and they have every right to.
You see D&D is not going to stop at 4th edition so people who don't really like the game can voice their concerns and hope the next edition is more to their liking.
Not when it is harsh and farsical clichés who show actually they have not really played.
And actually, technicaly, if you don't buy a book... you don't matters from a capitalistic perspective. AND this is the way also the complain about the direction.
You don't like this edition AND trash it? don't buy the books, play your favorite edition, and go to the Legacy Editions sections.
The recent direction has been decidedly backwards.
I personally like the new direction especially the decision to not be limited by power source (such an arbitary restriction). Definitely visionary and forward thinking.
Power source is / has always been about flavor more than anything else and there is also very little mechanics derived from it ( though there are power style trends amongst it )
Ie not particularly forward but its certainly a harmless differentiation. (ie allowing a class to have powers of more than one source) its pretty much the same as hybrids which were out and about for a ~year before published in phb3
4e is my least favorite edition of the game
Out of curiosity, what is your favourite?
AD&D1e is my favorite.
However, my experience is that any particular edition doesn't matter all that much. DMing style matters far, far more; it is truly the key to a fun game.
I've played under DMs whose play style did not match my own in 1e, 2e, 3.x, and 4e. The edition did not matter; the games bored me.
I've played under DMs whose play style did match my own in 1e, 2e, 3.x, and 4e. The edition did not matter; the games were fun.
Every campaign I have ever DMed under any edition has been fun because I control the play style as DM. Some players in my games have not had fun and dropped over the years because they did not enjoy my play style.
Edition simply does not shape the game that much if a DM doesn't want it to shape the game.
Totally agree with everything you just posted; and in a way, 1st Ed is my favourite too (drips with vibe), and funnily enough, since 4th Ed came out, I have had a hankering to start up a 1st Ed campaign alongside my 4th Ed (previously 3rd Ed).
The idea that the OP is instigating something is based on the concept that critiquing WOTC or 4e or the designers is an instigation. It is not. How could it be? Forum members are taking these statements as personal insults. ...
The OP is right. Maybe not for you, but for him he is right. His feelings about what WOTC are legitimate. He is a disgruntled customer. And he feels WOTC is ignoring him. So they are losing a customer. They have been losing a lot, I suspect. It’s bad business on their part.
The OP is most definitgely instigating. He didn't offer constructive critique, he offered straight-out complaining. The very thread title "everything you are doing is bad" is not civil, constructive or right. Were it "right" then 4E would have no players, which this forum shows is patently false.
Your assumptions also show a clear bias not backed up by data.
I never felt "betrayed" by edition changes. Ever. I didn't hold it against TSR when they released 2E. I didn't hold it against WotC when they released 3E. I didn't like 3E, so I didn't participate in it. I had been dabbling in other RPGs for several years by the time 3E came out, so I took that opportunity to further explore games like the various World of Darkness products, EarthDawn, Call of Cthulhu, GURPS, RoleMaster, Rifts, and a whole library of other titles.
I never once decided to vent my frustrations about 3E to WotC. I did something even better...I spoke with my wallet. I didn't buy 3E products*. When 3E gave way to 3.5, I didn't buy any of it, either. From 2000 until 2008, I only bought D&D products that furthered my old-E collections (from OD&D through the end of 2E). When 4E came out, I dove back in head-first.
I guess I just don't know where all the angst came from. Is it a sense of entitlement? I'm not sure. We've talked about this before, but I can't help to think that something happened between 3E and 4E, and I am so grateful and proud to say that I was not part of it. Some claim the ever-more encroaching presence of the internet is to blame. Some pass it off as "kids these days". I, for one, don't really have a clue. What I DO know is that I never saw the level of aggression and angst from the 3.X to 4E transition back when BECMI and 1E turned into 2E.
*- I did buy the core 3E books the day of release. We read them as a group for a week, played a few sessions, then sold the books and went back to 2E.
This, except I just bought the 3E PHB.
This, except I just bought the 3E PHB.
And how do you find it?
This, except I just bought the 3E PHB.
And how do you find it?
FLGS
Count me as someone who loved 2nd ed and 4th ed
This, except I just bought the 3E PHB.
And how do you find it?
FLGS
I guess you didn't read my question properly (I hope you weren't doing the other thing), as in how do you find 3rd Ed = what is your opinion of Dungeons & Dragons Third Edition?
I also didn't like the trap feat system and the bloat that really kicked in with 3.5. I'll admit I'm still not a big fan of feats as they are but I understand why they're there. I like books to read but want a concise system for accessing information (DDI and the Compendium are great for this) rather than having to use a physical stack of books wherever I'm at to do things. I also didn't like templates for races. I still don't play dragonborn or tieflings because they're an offshoot of things I didn't like.
I know there are people who like those things and I know I'm more extroverted than most people, let alone gamers, and I'm glad there's a system that they like and I'm glad Paizo puts out stuff for people who still like that system. I also hanker for playing an old school 1E/2E game if I could find the time.
Since it seems some people are interesting in continuing this discussion, I'm going to move it to RPGS General. The thread title and the fact the OP never came back for the discussion seems a bit baity for this particular forum to me.
Please remember to keep you posts civil in any case.
Dragonette.
The idea that the OP is instigating something is based on the concept that critiquing WOTC or 4e or the designers is an instigation. It is not. How could it be? Forum members are taking these statements as personal insults. ...
The OP is right. Maybe not for you, but for him he is right. His feelings about what WOTC are legitimate. He is a disgruntled customer. And he feels WOTC is ignoring him. So they are losing a customer. They have been losing a lot, I suspect. It’s bad business on their part.
The OP is most definitgely instigating. He didn't offer constructive critique, he offered straight-out complaining. The very thread title "everything you are doing is bad" is not civil, constructive or right. Were it "right" then 4E would have no players, which this forum shows is patently false.
Your assumptions also show a clear bias not backed up by data.
OK, I will bite yet again. Who is he instigating against? WOTC? He is their customer. They should want to hear from him, whether he is disgruntled or satisfied. A matter of fact I would want to hear from disgruntled customers more that satisfied ones. Is he instigating against you? How? He is not attacking you, he is saying he does not like the way WOTC is doing business and does not like the current design. How is that an instigation against you?
You also say i am biased. So are you assuming I do not like 4th edition? I do. Don’t mind essentials either. Don’t even feel there is an actual difference in the systems.
I do feel like many that WOTC is not really doing a lot of product support that I want to buy -- is that instigating?
If I have a bias it is when people say that people are whining or need security blankets. Those characterizations are insulting. I do not think they should be made. I also don’t like it when people twist the intent of a forum post away from what was the intention of the OP. Whether that is this post or one of my own. I especially don’t like when someone says: you are not playing right, you should play the game this way. You’re questioning of the game indicates that you do not play correctly.
These attitudes, which I see ALOT in these forums are to me the anti-thesis of D&D. D&D was always an inclusive game where people were allowed to speak their mind and be different. Now there is a sports-team/fan boy mentality to it that I think is sad.
Also you say my statements are not backed up by data? BY DATA? Was I supposed to ruin some tests and gather metrics on the forums. What does that even mean? How would I back up my personal evaluation of the OPs post by data?
Now, I do admit the the OP did know he was going to get strong reactions. He even stated that, BUT I do not feel the reactions are merited because I do not think he said anything hostile to anyone in the forum, and I do not think he's intention was to start a fight (to instigate) it was to express frustration as a customer.
I consider a grognard anyone who remembers older editions of a game with fondness.
Well, besides NOT being the definition of a grognard, that's just F(ouled) up.
Of all the editions of this game I've played - OD&D, BECMI/Compendium, AD&D1e, AD&D2e, 3.0, 3.5 & 4e, Pathfinder, etc - OF COURSE I'M GOING TO REMEMBER THE VERSION I'VE ENJOYED MOST WITH FONDNESS!
Just like I'll remember the one I've enjoyed the least with utter contempt.
I guess I just don't know where all the angst came from. Is it a sense of entitlement? I'm not sure. We've talked about this before, but I can't help to think that something happened between 3E and 4E, and I am so grateful and proud to say that I was not part of it. Some claim the ever-more encroaching presence of the internet is to blame. Some pass it off as "kids these days". I, for one, don't really have a clue. What I DO know is that I never saw the level of aggression and angst from the 3.X to 4E transition back when BECMI and 1E turned into 2E.
I can explain why that is.
It's because BECMI/AD&D1e & AD&D 2e are essentially the same game.
Granted, there's some differences between Basic & Advanced - most notably the seperation of race & class. And, depending upon wich edition of Basic you had, maybe you had to adjust to a larger set of alignments.
Then you had what is effectively a bunch of optional rules in advanced. - for ex; did you use weapon speed? How about all the modifiers for this weapon vs that armour/AC? Things like that.
But if you knew one or the other you were pretty much good to go the moment you picked up a 2e book.
And yes, there were some mechanics tweaks in 2e - but nothing that made the game completely different from what you were used to. Infact you could sub in older rules & not cause any damage....
Then came 3.0 with its unified XP chart, feats, skill point system, ascending AC values, new saving throw system, & an increased emphesis on minitures.
It was noticebly different from 2e & before.
But it was all a linear advancement of the previous editions. You'd still easily recognize it as D&D.
Infact we (the people I played with at the time) joked that if any edition should sport "Advanced" in the title this was certainly it.....
Enter 4e.
I'm sorry, but this is NOT the same game we'd been playing.
Oh sure, it's an RPG. And it uses all the odd shaped dice. And it has a bunch of familiar words/concepts....
But you know what? So do lots of other RPGs that aren't D&D....
This edition is only D&D because that's what logo WoTC/Hasbro stuck on it.
So it shouldn't be any real surprise that a large % of customers weren't pleased.
And we should NOT discount the effect the internets played.
It is infinitely easier to argue about this stuff now - with people all over the world - than it was back when 2e dawned.
This then spills right back over into the local scene as people discuss & react to how others (whom they'll never meet) view the product.
The venom and vile that the 3.5 to 4th edition angst is likely still not as bad as the transition from 2nd to 3.0, though I do think the 3.0 to 3.5 was better received.