| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4438 Posts |
 Posted - 16 Jan 2011 : 15:47:47
|
@ Quale- Cards and miniatures have been in D&D for a long, ling time.I can remember when my uncle used metal miniatures for his 2e games and used playing cards with paper taped over them and spells written on that paper so the players handbook would see less wear and tear. So yes, those aspects are ingrained into the genre. Board games, not so much but its Hasbro™, of course they're going to make board games.
As for the generalization of 4e gamers, I really dont agree since it boils down to the gamer NOT the edition. However, I too generalize when it comes to 2e/AD&D gamers as I feel the lot of them are self-righteous, elitist, and draconic in their thinking of how D&D should be. Ah well c'est la vie. |
 |
|
|
Knight of the Gate
Senior Scribe
USA
624 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jan 2011 : 16:17:13
|
It's funny that Diffan and Matt J. both took Quale's comment on powergamers to be directed at 4E specifically; I think what he said has some truth to it, and always has. The battle of 'crunch v. fluff' was won years ago in favor of crunch; at least in terms of what books sold in larger numbers. I don't think it's at all an edition-specific problem. You could point to the dozens of kit-filled splat books in 2E, the similarly numerous 'complete' books of 3E, and the several PHBs of 4E to get the same outcome; lots and lots of (non-setting specific) crunch.
Now, I'm not going to say that *all* that love of crunch is purely indicative of powergaming; quite a lot of it could be in use by DMs running homebrew worlds, and of course there are those of us who use setting-neutral stuff in published settings, all for the greater glory of roleplaying. Having said that, I think that we've all known far too many players who buy every supplement, hoping to find some edge for their PC, and I agree with Quale inasmuch as I think that some large percentage of books sold go to that subset of gamers.
Please note that I am not trying to put words in anyone's mouth; it may be that Quale was taking a shot at 4E, it may not. I just wanted to say that *I* didn't see it as such. |
How can life be so bountiful, providing such sublime rewards for mediocrity? -Umberto Ecco |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jan 2011 : 18:10:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
WotC did a step in the right direction lately, but is dying cause the majority of customers are powergamers, with an endless greed for new mechanics bonuses, at the same time screaming about balance.
Youch, that's quite an amazing generalization and stereotype. Thanks for the reminder on why this site is viewed largely as arrogant 
Yeah, because every single one of us holds a similar opinion. 
CHILL
There's way to much of this 'taken-out-of-context' crap going on lately.
We are all individuals, and all of our opinions will will be different (regardless of what 'camp' you normally find yourself in).
And I was born arrogant, long before this site came to be, and before Ed even dreamed up the Realms. It had nothing to do with Candlekeep. 
And I would say that D&D has been a haven for 'power-Gamers' since the first Unearthed Arcana came out, and has very little to do with editions. There are plenty of other systems that use varying degrees of rules vs roleplay, with the far end of the extreme being the 'story-teller' type (which failed miserably for DL, IIRC).
The nature of D&D - with it's never-ending slew of splatbooks - engenders this mindset, so while you may call such an attitude 'arrogant', it is true, in general, regarding the game itself (and not the edition).
In my experience, every single D&D group I have been part of has had its min-maxers and rules lawyers, but very rarely did I EVER encounter those while playing under other systems. The problem lies in the fact that the rules are NEVER 'finished' - a problem CCG's also suffer from. Since the rules always expand beyond a normal person's (like most DM's) ability to know them all, those types of players will randomly spawn beyond our ability to curtail them.
The only way to get away from that is to play under a system that is 'finished', and since splats are released right up to within a few weeks of a new edition, that is obviously impossible to accomplish with D&D (unless major changes are made concerning its future design, which I have yet to see).
Installment-style products (like D&D rules and CCG's) will always attract collectors. Collectors, by their nature, are the type of people who thrive on the "have more then you" attitude, and therein lies the core of the problem. You can 'beat someone' simply by knowing/having 'more rules then them' (or better cards, in the case of CCG's, which means people with more money will have an unfair advantage).
So while Quale's comment may have been somewhat insulting, the fact is that nearly all of us here are collectors (at least of FR), and are therefor slightly guilty of falling into that category of power-gamer, simple by our superior knowledge (and larger collection of products) of the setting itself. we may not be power-gamers when it comes to the rules, but I truly pity the unprepared FR DM who tries to run a game for one of us (making most of us 'power-setting gamers').
And such is the nature of D&D - it is no longer conducive to the 'light weekend session of gaming fun' it once was, which is why I am so confused by some of WotC's decisions. A fun, non-serious, 'frolic' into a dungeon DOES NOT WORK when you have to rummage through the PH #37. There are systems that do that, and do it well, but a theoretically infinite number of rules (and seriously, that is what D&D has become) is not the right rules for a 'quick game session between friends'. You can't have both.
Build a simple, CLOSED system, or build a never-ending rules set for serious players that are in it for the long haul. You expect to market a game to people who do not want to read 20 books full of setting lore, but are more then willing to read 40 books of rules - THAT PLAYER DOESN'T EXIST (in large-enough numbers to make it profitable). Unless you are some sort of masochistic math-nerd, why would anyone prefer endless rules over setting detail? If you are going to market a system to people who don't like to read, then producing 20 new rule books a year just isn't going to work. I am simply having a hard time seeing who their 'target audience' is, which is why I have used things like 'needs focus' and 'wishy-washy' in past rants. From all appearances, rather then 'taking aim', they are firing volley after volley in random directions hoping to score a hit. KNOW YOUR TARGET AUDIENCE, and keep your goals in sight. You can't sell hotdogs off a cart in Beverly Hills, and you can't sell Filet Mignon in a trailer park. It has nothing to do with quality, and everything to do with knowing your market.
But I have gone on too long once again, and I apologize. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 16 Jan 2011 18:13:49 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4438 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jan 2011 : 19:12:05
|
Since the thread is about 4E future and Quale's use of the word 'lately', I assumed that he was referring to customers of WotC currently (those that purchase 4E material).
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
And such is the nature of D&D - it is no longer conducive to the 'light weekend session of gaming fun' it once was, which is why I am so confused by some of WotC's decisions. A fun, non-serious, 'frolic' into a dungeon DOES NOT WORK when you have to rummage through the PH #37. There are systems that do that, and do it well, but a theoretically infinite number of rules (and seriously, that is what D&D has become) is not the right rules for a 'quick game session between friends'. You can't have both.
I disagree whole-heartedly. The player can just as easily build a character straight from 1 PHB and that's it and still have that easy-going, lite fun. Nothing is making anyone delve into the multiple source books for that one feat that completes the build or magical sword that a player feels is designed with him in mind.
It's when you want a style that's NOT offered in the PHB that you'd like to play is when it becomes a more in-depth search of other supplements. But that again is totally players choice if he decides to get more complex with his character.
You can have both if both PLAYER and DM are willing to do their part in making it easier. I don't expect a DM to know everything MY player can do, the rules for how my class features work, or my usual tactics for that character. I do, however, tell him what he does, how he does it, and the sources I used to make it. I take the time and energy to know the facts and have those facts easily accessable to lessen time requirments. I make it as rules intensive as I feel needed for a particular character but thats me. I could just as easily take the PHB 1 and go with a character from there with no Muss or Fuss OR take the Heroes of the Fallen Lands (or other Essential) books and make up a fun, in-depth character based on those 'simpler' rules.
|
|
|
|
froglegg
Learned Scribe
317 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jan 2011 : 22:40:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
WotC did a step in the right direction lately, but is dying cause the majority of customers are powergamers, with an endless greed for new mechanics bonuses, at the same time screaming about balance.
Youch, that's quite an amazing generalization and stereotype. Thanks for the reminder on why this site is viewed largely as arrogant
Yeah, because every single one of us holds a similar opinion.
+1
John |
Long live Alias and Dragonbait! Kate Novak and Jeff Grubb the Realms need you more then ever!
On my word as a sage nothing within these pages is false, but not all of it may prove to be true. - Elminster of Shadowdale
The Old Grey Box gets better with age! |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31772 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2011 : 01:10:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
WotC did a step in the right direction lately, but is dying cause the majority of customers are powergamers, with an endless greed for new mechanics bonuses, at the same time screaming about balance.
Youch, that's quite an amazing generalization and stereotype. Thanks for the reminder on why this site is viewed largely as arrogant
I'm a little surprised by this claim, Matt. I thought my efforts to counter this kind of misinformation here at Candlekeep was largely meeting with some limited success. Do you have a source which notes otherwise? |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3567 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2011 : 01:54:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
WotC did a step in the right direction lately, but is dying cause the majority of customers are powergamers, with an endless greed for new mechanics bonuses, at the same time screaming about balance.
Youch, that's quite an amazing generalization and stereotype. Thanks for the reminder on why this site is viewed largely as arrogant
Thanks for your reminder why many designers are viewed as arrogant as well
I've never stated it anywhere , but have read a lot of instances were people think it's so.
It's a shame this site is suffering from that perception, because if it's even a tiny bit true, then in comparison, the wizards boards must be the largest collection of self important individuals ever gathered in one forum |
A little nonsense now and then, relished by the wisest men - Willy Wonka
"We need men who can dream of things that never were." -
John F. Kennedy, speech in Dublin, Ireland, June 28, 1963
|
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4438 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2011 : 01:56:25
|
| The anti-4e rhetoric has died down somewhat, this is true but even I admit that the animonsity is still there and the childish cheap shots still happen. And since 4E heralded in the changes to the Realms, the diatriabe is thicker here than on some other messageboards. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31772 Posts |
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2011 : 04:04:44
|
the following comment is true to describe both sides of the fence.
Twice the pride, Twice the Fall- Count Dooku
as to the fate of 4e, the Realms, eberron, Grayhawk, DRagonlance, POL quasi setting, well they are all in the hands of Hasbro, and Hasbro is more than anything a company wanting to make a profit off it.
and Hasbro is a company that makes games and toys for the whole family....... and profits from it.
I blame corperate Greed and Poke'mon
|
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
Edited by - sfdragon on 17 Jan 2011 04:13:47 |
|
|
|
Shemmy
Senior Scribe
USA
492 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2011 : 11:24:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
Youch, that's quite an amazing generalization and stereotype. Thanks for the reminder on why this site is viewed largely as arrogant
I'm a little surprised by this claim, Matt. I thought my efforts to counter this kind of misinformation here at Candlekeep was largely meeting with some limited success. Do you have a source which notes otherwise?
I still love you guys. Even if the closest I've come to writing Realms material was including a cleric of Lathander in a Planescape piece in Dragon, and the Entreri and Lolth writeups in the same magazine's final issue. |
Shemeska the Marauder, King of the Crosstrade; voted #1 best Arcanaloth in Sigil two hundred years running by the people who know what's best for them; chant broker; prospective Sigil council member next election; and official travel agent for Chamada Holiday specials LLC.
|
|
|
|
Tasker Daze
Seeker
84 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2011 : 11:50:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
WotC did a step in the right direction lately, but is dying cause the majority of customers are powergamers, with an endless greed for new mechanics bonuses, at the same time screaming about balance.
Youch, that's quite an amazing generalization and stereotype. Thanks for the reminder on why this site is viewed largely as arrogant
If we're so arrogant, why are you here? If I think people on a particular forum are rude or arrogant, I quit going to that forum.
You complain about a stereotpye and deliver one in the same sentence. |
. |
|
|
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3567 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2011 : 12:07:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tasker Daze
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
WotC did a step in the right direction lately, but is dying cause the majority of customers are powergamers, with an endless greed for new mechanics bonuses, at the same time screaming about balance.
Youch, that's quite an amazing generalization and stereotype. Thanks for the reminder on why this site is viewed largely as arrogant
If we're so arrogant, why are you here? If I think people on a particular forum are rude or arrogant, I quit going to that forum.
You complain about a stereotpye and deliver one in the same sentence.
I cannot speak for Matt, but I'm sure(100%) that is not his opinion, I believe he is sharing something he has heard from "others" |
A little nonsense now and then, relished by the wisest men - Willy Wonka
"We need men who can dream of things that never were." -
John F. Kennedy, speech in Dublin, Ireland, June 28, 1963
|
Edited by - The Red Walker on 17 Jan 2011 12:09:03 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4438 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2011 : 13:17:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tasker Daze
If we're so arrogant, why are you here? If I think people on a particular forum are rude or arrogant, I quit going to that forum.
You complain about a stereotpye and deliver one in the same sentence.
Yep, these kind of quotes just help fuel intelligent conversations and lively debate. I think this scroll has served it's purpose informing people what's happening with WotC for the time being. I vote to have it closed lest we have more vitriolic responses that drive the wedge of gamer-angst further. |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2011 : 14:01:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tasker Daze
If we're so arrogant, why are you here? If I think people on a particular forum are rude or arrogant, I quit going to that forum.
You complain about a stereotpye and deliver one in the same sentence.
Great point. Not my intent, but fair enough all the same :)
Enjoy the Realms, folks. No matter where they take you! |
|
|
|
Quale
Master of Realmslore
1757 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2011 : 14:11:22
|
| I did not speak of any particular edition of players, close to what Knight of the Gate said. What type of D&D books are sell the best, to me the answer is obvious why, if anyone has other theories. With 4e WotC spoiled a certain type of players, then turned to others. Maybe if they slowed down, distributed what different groups of customers more evenly, powergamers needed some foreplay. |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4438 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2011 : 15:00:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
I did not speak of any particular edition of players, close to what Knight of the Gate said. What type of D&D books are sell the best, to me the answer is obvious why, if anyone has other theories. With 4e WotC spoiled a certain type of players, then turned to others. Maybe if they slowed down, distributed what different groups of customers more evenly, powergamers needed some foreplay.
Sorry to have jumped to conclusions. As for what books sell the most, I think the better products are ones designed for DMs. Take Open Grave, a favorite of mine when it comes to 4E books as it pertains to A LOT of information (not so much rule info) about how Undead work, how they function, why they function, etc. This was way more interesting to me than say....Martial Power 2 which is designed to build different Martial characters. Sure, power/feats/skill usages are good to have if your a player and diversity is the spice of life, but in the grand scheme of things, the non-rules heavy books are more interesting IMO.
Since I've played very little of 2e/AD&D, I'm not too sure what to expect from WotC in terms of their books. Gaming supplements are and should be designed to advance the 'game'. This to me means more crunch and rules. However in setting books there should be more of a fluff angle, detailing the setting's people, religion, areas of intrigue, plots, and so forth. My main issue with 4E-FR was the FRCG, as it detailed that whole "intro" campaign of Loudwater. Not that I don't mind the detailed city and adventures that go along with it, it should NOT have been in the book. Those pages could've easily been used for more explaination of Abier, lost areas of Lantan or Nimbral, or even more info on Deities or Cultures of the various races. The book needed more 'fluff' and not so much on a mini-campaign.
And WotC has slowed down, hence why we're only seeing 3-4 gaming supplements out this year. I've stated that this is a good thing, since I'm hoping the quality of the product is good, involving lots of lore and tid-bits to use in my campaigns. But only time will tell.
|
|
|
|
Mr_Miscellany
Senior Scribe
545 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2011 : 19:42:04
|
Hello Apex,
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
As someone who played from the beginning of second edition, I would say the changes were very dramatic, as the game went from DM centric to player centric (ie all the skills/abilities/builds replacing the archtype and uniform system)
Have to admit I've not considered the possibility someone used to being a DM under 2E might look at the 3E rules and say something to the effect of "[censored] is this?"
I didn't have this reaction myself (having played 2E), but I see where you're coming from now.
When I look back at the 3E core rulebooks only, I see a system that's equally friendly to the DM and to the player (I don’t see it as player centric). The rules work the same for both, without exceptions. When I look at the 3E core rulebooks, I see rulebooks laid out the same as their 2E predecessors and not much in terms of layout and rules structure that's hugely different, beyond Feats, an expanded list of skills and no silly THAC0.
This isn't something I see with the 4E rulebooks. Things have gone back to being vague (in my opinion) about how the rules work for monsters vs. how they work for players vs. NPCs. I don't like that, at all. PCs have lists at the end of their class descriptions that all look like spell lists, but aren't, and all share one unified list for level progression. And the magic items are in the PHB for Pete's Sake!
It's these last that are to me what defines a big drastic change. Much more so in my opinion then 3E's "equal mechanics for all" setup.
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
As for sales, sure 1st year 3rd edition killed last year of second, but i would bet my bottom dollar that in real terms (ie inflation adjusted) early second edition would have killed 3rd in sales.
I would bet against you here. If we're talking just core rulebooks, I'd wager 3E's core rulebooks outsold 2E's for the first five years. I have no way of backing this bet up with facts lolz.
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
[quote]Here, I would argue that no changes are ever needed in a successful game (ie monopoly) and especially so in a mature game system (which is what D&D was by mid second edition).
I agree. There's value in letting a good thing remain A. Good. Thing.
Just my opinion here, but I think 2E's problems were built into the mechanics at the core rulebook level. Lots of DMs and players made adjustments to the game to suit their tastes (Demihuman level limits? Not in my D&D game!) and then kept on playing, but those houserules to me were just indicative that the game needed some kind of overhaul...which is why I like 3E so darn much. 
I wonder if they (TSR) ever considered a revision to the rules midway through...sort of like a version 2.5 just as WotC did a 3.5? Wait, didn't they sort of...hrmm? |
Edited by - Mr_Miscellany on 17 Jan 2011 20:08:26 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2011 : 20:37:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr_Miscellany
I wonder if they (TSR) ever considered a revision to the rules midway through...sort of like a version 2.5 just as WotC did a 3.5? Wait, didn't they sort of...hrmm?
Well, there was the Player's Option and DM's Option series of books, not too long before the end of 2E. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
BARDOBARBAROS
Senior Scribe
Greece
581 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2011 : 21:27:49
|
| The fact that wizards are planning to stop publishing these books of 4E is good for me!!! Actually as i said on another topic the sales of 4E core books are not satisfactory for wizards... Let's hope that now they will have their SPELLPLAGUE (actually BOOKPLAGUE) and leave FAERUN alone to find it's way !!! |
BARDOBARBAROS DOES NOT KILL.
HE DECAPITATES!!!
"The city changes, but the fools within it remain always the same" (Edwin Odesseiron- Baldur's gate 2) |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31772 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jan 2011 : 00:18:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Mr_Miscellany
I wonder if they (TSR) ever considered a revision to the rules midway through...sort of like a version 2.5 just as WotC did a 3.5? Wait, didn't they sort of...hrmm?
Well, there was the Player's Option and DM's Option series of books, not too long before the end of 2E.
And those books did attempt to modify the existing basis for established 3e rules. They were presented as options, of course, instead of any replacements for the existing components of 2e, but I suppose you could consider them "revisions" to a certain extent. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jan 2011 : 18:08:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by BARDOBARBAROS
...and leave FAERUN alone to find it's way !!!
Find it's way WHERE?
We may not like what WotC has done to the Realms, but they are all we got. If they decide to throw in the towel, that's it; Hasbro isn't know for selling off IP's.
Big companies often buy small companies just to bury them (not that that what Hasbro was doing in this case), which demonstrates the fact that a corporation would rather see an IP die, then see it be successful in someone else's hands. NOT a knock against Hasbro by any means - I'm just pointing out that them selling FR to anyone at all is less likely then Elminster showing up on Earth and and bringing peace to the Middle-East.
You may not like them, but Hasbro is all we got - its them or nothing. The magic game-fairies aren't going to show-up and save us this time.
"Be careful what you wish for..." |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Alisttair
Great Reader
Canada
3054 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jan 2011 : 18:10:23
|
| Tis' true that should WotC pull the plug on the Realms, they will keep it as their IP because they might one day want to revive it (as they had done with Dark Sun). |
Karsite Arcanar (Most Holy Servant of Karsus)
Anauria - Survivor State of Netheril as penned by me:
http://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/172023 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4438 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jan 2011 : 14:22:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
We may not like what WotC has done to the Realms, but they are all we got.
I like what they've done to the place !!
But yes, WotC would NOT give up the IP and either shelf it for later use OR let it die in obscurity as a game supplement. The novels would probably go on for longer, but that's a different story.
Though I've not seen any evidence to say that FR is going anywhere IMO. A smaller product release schedule doesn't mean that things are bad but that WotC is taking a slower pace as to what supplements are really needed. Do we really need a Player's Handbook 4? Or another Arcane Power book? Not really. The 25 base classes (not including Hybrid options) are good enough for now plus we have the 8 or so new Essentials variants which are still brand-new. I think WotC is taking a big, deep breath before diving back into the heavy publication of splat books. |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jan 2011 : 17:43:02
|
3E - 2000
3.5 - 2003
4E - 2007 (announced)
5E - ?
Not saying that 5E would be a MAJOR change like 3.5 to 4E, but maybe a change more like OD&D to AD&D?
I remember being at GenCon in 2007 when they announced 4E and remembering that nobody saw the announcement coming.
Just sayin' |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
Edited by - Ashe Ravenheart on 22 Jan 2011 17:43:28 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4438 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jan 2011 : 18:18:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
3E - 2000
3.5 - 2003
4E - 2007 (announced)
5E - ?
Not saying that 5E would be a MAJOR change like 3.5 to 4E, but maybe a change more like OD&D to AD&D?
I remember being at GenCon in 2007 when they announced 4E and remembering that nobody saw the announcement coming.
Just sayin'
5E - 2015 (just a guess)
And yea, it'll be different than 4E. Since I don't know jack about OD&D or that much about AD&D I don't get the comparison but I think people were expecting a change from v3.5, just not when. People's perspective as to what changes were going to happen ranged from a slight variation on v3.5 to wide tales of only being used Online. Like I mentioned earlier, it had an impossible vision to full-fill.
The problem is, I don't think people would've been happy with WotC no matter what they put out. Even if it had been more like Pathfinder, there would've been a huge Nerd-Rage over them re-inventing the wheel, or milking more money out of us for some variant rules, or some other sort of BS nerds get mad at.
The simple matter is, 4E was NEEDED to A.) appeal to a bigger fan-base. A fan-base less concerned about the intricate rules designed for hard core Role Players and more about hack'n'slash (I know, I'm one of them). B.) Get away from the bell curve of how classes work and progress. A level 1 fighter beats a level 1 wizard. A level 20 fighter loses to a level 20 wizard. In 4E, it's still about average. 3.) A reason to re-invent the entire product line with new Rules and make money. Can the Libris Mortis: Book of the Dead(v3.5) supplement be used in 4E? Sure, but with Open Grave a DM has new monsters, feats, and traps to throw at your new 4E characters with NO conversion needed.
Plus, with 4E comes competition of Paizo/Pathfinder. With them putting out great supplements under their own flag, it doesn't seem like they're milking us for more money since it's not associated with the title of D&D and they do their own Campaign Setting.
But don't think 4E is done by any means. It's still a power-house in the RPG world and still has hundreds of thousands of fans that buy every bit of source material they pump out. |
Edited by - Diffan on 22 Jan 2011 18:21:20 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jan 2011 : 18:29:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
But don't think 4E is done by any means. It's still a power-house in the RPG world and still has hundreds of thousands of fans that buy every bit of source material they pump out.
3.5 had that. And Pathfinder proves that a large number of those fans are still there. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4438 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jan 2011 : 19:46:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
But don't think 4E is done by any means. It's still a power-house in the RPG world and still has hundreds of thousands of fans that buy every bit of source material they pump out.
3.5 had that. And Pathfinder proves that a large number of those fans are still there.
Of course they're still there, I wasn't implying that they aren't. Heck, I'm a Pathfinder fan too. But you don't sell products without revamping the system at some point. Pathfinder revamped v3.5 (as some now call it v3.75) but had they just used OGL rules, put out their own Setting material, and changed little in the way of the game (new feats, PrCs, Skill Usages) I don't feel it would've been as succcessful as it is. Espically if WotC hadn't gone the 4E route.
But the main problem lies in the fact that once the gamers have the supplements, there's little else to buy. The market is finite and unless you change things up, that market will dry up and die. Take Paizo for example. They're setting is truly interesting and their writing staff is pretty darn impressive. Their adventures are extensive, have regional depth, and are intrinsic with what's great about Golarion. They can spam all sorts of things from that setting alone AND branch off to other parts of their world. In 5 or 10 years, Golarion will start to decline. Everyone who's anyone thats a fan of the setting will have the adventure paths, the Beastaries, the Advanced Player's Guides, the Regional Books, the Reaper Miniatures, the novels. But when that's done....then what? Then you'll have more material, maybe that's not as great as the original APG or Beastary or brings in new material that deals with Psionics on Golarion.
Maybe they get the rules for Martial classes and bring in their own version of the Tome of Battle or Tome of Magic. But that'll lessen "purists" view of what Golarion should be. |
|
|
|
Quale
Master of Realmslore
1757 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jan 2011 : 21:18:28
|
that will happen eventually, til then enjoy
tough I've seen Mona say they'll never run out of places in Golarion, and there's other planets |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jan 2011 : 23:08:23
|
They would have never run out of room on Toril, either. It was their choice to keep producing sourcebooks covering the same regions and subjects (like Drow). Fans were begging for a new Old Empires regional book.
I'm still wondering why they choose Rokugon for 3eOA, when FR was supposedly 3e's flagship setting.
Its a fantasy setting, which means by definition EVERYTHING is made-up, which proves the fallacy of such statements as "everything was already detailed". The only thing it proves is that they were unable to create new material (for whatever reason). At what point is a world where you can create whatever you like too detailed to create more information?
And I'm not even talking about other continents - I'm talking about how Ed can take a simple question in his thread and go on for several pages about it. Things as 'small' as a single personage, locale, or item.
They created a system focused around "roleplay-lite" because they CAN'T do what Ed does - make every single thing interesting. Ed probably has enough unknown Realms-lore in his basement to publish 20 splats a year for the next 50 years.
A business-model that depends on never-ending rules is doomed to failure through maximum saturation (and over-complexity), whereas a closed system that revolves around never-ending setting-detail appeals to the collectors, which nearly all gamers are at heart.
Paizo doesn't plan on producing less splats, only the right kind of splats. The world (setting) is the most interesting aspect of RPGing, and perhaps WotC has lost sight of that. The rules are a tool, nothing more, and they are NOT the reason why we play.
Look at it this way: the novels are the most lucrative aspect of the Forgotten Realms at this point, and they don't rely on the rules at all. Millions of fans who have probably never cracked-open a D&D rule book. If that's not proof that the setting is FAR MORE important then the rules, then I don't know what is.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
The simple matter is, 4E was NEEDED to A.) appeal to a bigger fan-base. A fan-base less concerned about the intricate rules designed for hard core Role Players and more about hack'n'slash (I know, I'm one of them).
"Just killing stuff for phat lewts" is already done, VERY WELL, by comp/video games, and is not really a great future plan for P&P RPGs, IMHO. I enjoy sessions of that myself, and play several MORPGs - everything from Wizards101 to World of Warcraft, and while I have great fun playing them, that's not what I want out of my P&P sessions, which I enjoy far more (when I can get them).
Not a knock, at all - I just don't think that trying to compete with the electronic market place is a good business decision. P&P RPGs should focus on what they can do that VG's can't, which is to give us a completely interactive and immersive game world. Focus on your strengths, NOT on your competition's strengths. They will never be able to do the eye-candy thing better then VGs, which is what makes the hack'N'slash game so playable. Without the visuals, most modern electronic RPGs are little more then math-tables and random-number generators. Thats just rules - the layer 'underneath' that most of us never see. I first played comp games before we had monitors (just teletypes), and remember what that was like before the sweet visuals (so yeah, Myst changed the world). That old-school computer knowledge allows me to comprehend the underlying code, and see 'the man behind the curtain'. It ain't pretty; it's all just math... just like a crunch-based splatbook. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 23 Jan 2011 17:40:26 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
The future of 4E
