| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Rory
Seeker
79 Posts |
 Posted - 30 May 2009 : 07:42:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
I can't speak for the others, but my own reasons are:
1) 4th Edition doesn't feel like D&D to me. I've been playing since '83-'84, starting with the BECMI, then 2nd AD&D, and through 3.0/3.5. I've also played about half-a-dozen different MMORPGs. Usually for about a month, then I get bored and stop playing. 4th Edition feels to me like the MMORPG, minimizing imagination and character detail for 'points of light' campaigns. I know not all feel the same way, but that's how it feels to me.
2) Spellplague and 100-year time jump. I've been a fan of the Realms most of my gaming history. In fact the only other two settings that I'm just as passionate about are Shadowrun and BattleTech. And, having gone through the 'timejump' with BattleTech and seeing that rip the game into two, I cannot understand why they decided to the same thing to the Realms. And, it's not the overall outcome of the Spellplague and time jump that ticks me off, it's that they did it for the simple reason to tell everyone 'the past no longer matters'. Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it. And I predict that will happen with the Realms as well, with a 'Classic Realms' game supplement will be started with a third-party company (most likely Paizo) to write the game through the 100 years. Then Hasbro will give up the license and 4th Edition will become a memory, much like WizKids' MechWarrior Dark Ages Clicktech is in the process of becoming.
I would like to add something to that. As skeptical as I was when I first heard the criticism of 4e, specifically of the comparisons to MMORPGs and the influence from their success I have come to realize that its not just the misery of the 'good ole day gamer's' resistants to change. There are some real parallels. The 100 year advancement to a world thats open so 'gamers can take the lead' was often talked about in interviews in a way that would lead you to believe that the goal was to wipe the lore so people that were new to the game wouldn't feel overwhelmed. Its almost as if they wanted an actual MMORPG in the Forgotten Realms and if that is true then the Spellplague and 100-year time jumpwas an even greater mistake.
To really make hay in the MMORPG market you need something different. IF I was designing a FR MMORPG I would want as many famous NPCs and gods as possible roleplayed by the game's developers' and the author's that dig MMORPGs. These VIPs would have made the game original and gave it a hell of a niche and I have never bought the counter argument that the gods and VIPs would have taken center stage. |
 |
|
|
sneakypetev
Acolyte
USA
24 Posts |
Posted - 30 May 2009 : 08:51:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zealot
Ashe your post was bloody brilliant. I think what you said about 4th Edition is exactly right. I started playing back when you still got those crappy little baby blue dice in your boxed sets. It's funny, I went out and spent alot of money buying into 3E but all my 2E and 1stE books were all easily transferable. Its just the soul and feel of the game is getting leeched out slowly. I dont mind the game growing to change but it seems that WotC is out for the almighty dollar and the fans are left to twist. Just ask Ema.
"Crappy little baby blue dice", good times! I agree w/ you. I don't mind change, and 3.5 needed change,( or major tune up), but it was easier and therefore cheaper to to wipe the slate clean w/ both 3.5 and the Realms,losing,in my case, a long time FR fan who had purchased every FR scource book and novel pre 4E. Well maybe they will get it right when 5E comes out, but I don't see how they can repair the Realms. |
"Go for the eyes boo,go for the eyes!"- Minsc |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 30 May 2009 : 20:45:38
|
Right.
I have no problem with the 4e rules, and may even use them at some point... either in a world of my own making, or in something like Eberron (or perhaps even GH, once again).
However, FR is about Roleplay first... always has been. Rules were secondary - just Ask Ed.
You felt as if you were part of some 'larger-then-life' tapestry that was still playing itself out. It was glorious.
I just don't get that feeling with the new setting, and I don't feel the 4e rules are appropriate for it; that's all.
I enjoy all sorts of gaming, and MMORPG are fun, and an amalgam of a tabletop and computer game (which is how I view the 4e rules) has its place and could be great for an evening of 'roleplay-light'. The concept isn't new; before it I played GW's Mordheim (great little game), and WAY before that I played FGU's Fire, Hack, and Run. Both sets of rules were designed for small unit interaction and combat encounters (almost like an RP version of Squad Leader. I enjoyed the hell out of them, and didn't worry about character concepts, or weather I'd live through the next encounter.
Ergo, 4e rules can make a comfortable niche for itself... I just find it a very bad match for the FR setting (even after they boiled the setting down to the lowest common denominators). |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 30 May 2009 20:47:41 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Rant From Ed's Scroll...
