| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Sanishiver
Senior Scribe
USA
476 Posts |
 Posted - 07 Aug 2006 : 05:26:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by GothicDan
I think that a lot of what we consider about 2E to be 'arbitrary' merely meant that it was mating mechanics to fluff, irrevocably, to the point of being hindersome.
'Arbitrary' in this sense means without consideration for the baseline rules-set or play-balance.
This why the 2E mechanics of yore were so out of whack when it came to translating fluff into crunch.
3E recognizes that campaigns will have a variety of unique elements and provides mechanics to bring those elements into play without tipping the scales fun/balance wise.
J. Grenemyer
|
09/20/2008: Tiger Army at the Catalyst in Santa Cruz. You wouldn’t believe how many females rode it out in the pit. Santa Cruz women are all of them beautiful. Now I know to add tough to that description.
6/27/2008: WALL-E is about the best damn movie Pixar has ever made. It had my heart racing and had me rooting for the good guy.
9/9/2006: Dave Mathews Band was off the hook at the Shoreline Amphitheater.
Never, ever read the game books too literally, or make such assumptions that what is omitted cannot be. Bad DM form, that.
And no matter how compelling a picture string theory paints, if it does not accurately describe our universe, it will be no more relevant than an elaborate game of Dungeons and Dragons. --paragraph 1, chapter 9, The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene |
 |
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 07 Aug 2006 : 15:18:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by EytanBernstein
quote:
Originally posted by Alaundo
Well met
Some very good points raised here, Kiaransalyn and I quite agree.
I've already stated that when a 4th edition is released, I will cease any further D&D core purchases. The thought of going through this all again...buying another PHB, DMG, MMI-?? etc. is very unappealing. I have more than enough core material to last me a lifetime. I'll still continue to purchase FR products, purely for the lore etc, however.
I would much prefer it WotC had produced material on the same lines as some other RPG producers.... have a core set of books which contain all the crunch (which they currently do, in effect), and have the campaign specific products be purely fluff. This really appeals to me. On this similiar note, Black Industries (Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay) produce products which contain a mix of rules and lore, whilst another arm of Games Workshop called Black Library, produce "background books" and novels. These background books are fluff from cover to cover. Even the printing information is done as if printed in the "Old World".
I certainly can't blame people for feeling this way. If I wasn't a game designer, I might have the same perspective. As a designer, I can't help but like 3rd/3.5 better, simply because longing for 2nd edition would be counterproductive. It helps that I actually like 3.5, but I have a weird head for numbers. When I write characters or create creatures, they must have a combination of lore, mechanical viability, and numerical fluidity. I'm not happy with a creation unless it works on both the level of the setting and the current ruleset (whatever it may be). 2nd edition was far too arbitrary and mechanically clunky for me. I definitely enjoyed it while it was around, but when 3rd ed. was on the horizon, it was something I felt was desperately needed.
4th ed. would make the lives of most designers more complicated, simply because we have to learn a new ruleset. That said, it might be a better ruleset and its inception my be a harbinger of new opportunities for those who can adapt. Regardless, it isn't looming in the next year, so I will continue to focus on the products in the current edition.
Eytan, I think that is really the crux of this whole discussion. Its not coming in the next year, and SOMEDAY there will be a 4th edition, unless the game dies out completely (so decide which is worse from your own perspective), and anything else on the subject is still only speculation. |
|
|
|
khorne
Master of Realmslore
Finland
1073 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2006 : 09:37:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
It will be interesting to see what changes 4E will usher into the Realms.
-- George Krashos
Interesting, or terrifying? |
If I were a ranger, I would pick NDA for my favorite enemy |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6662 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2006 : 12:00:04
|
If you think that changes based around game mechanics and rules are terrifying, then you may have a different FR focus from me. Whether she is a 19th level magic user, a 26th level wizard or a wizard 20/sorceror 10/ archmage 5, the Simbul will always be the same in my Realms. Stats and game rules from edition to edition will never change the fundamentals of the Realms.
-- George Krashos
|
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2006 : 13:33:58
|
With 3/3.5 we have a solid, logical and above all fast system, and I hate to say it AD&D in all its incarnations was everything but. Today, I tried to explain the THAC0 mechanics of old to a new gamer who has just started with 3.5, and he said "What the hell, you want a quick to grasp system that gets deeper the more you learn so that you can sell this stuff."
It is a business after all, and personally, now that I have some experience with 3.5 I am glad that they did not try to expand on the die-rolling-mechanic of old. The roll-high, roll-low thing was confusing, even to more experienced players, at times.
With 3.5 being as good as it is, and when 4th edition comes out, I think they will not change the core system that much, but basically do what 2nd edition did to 1st edition AD&D, after all, there hardly was that much of a change in the game system back in 1989... |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Marc
Senior Scribe
657 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2006 : 16:48:41
|
I just don't understand what's up with those miniatures, I don't want to play warhammer, just FR, IMO miniatures just ruin your imagination
|
. |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2006 : 16:58:08
|
There was another thread a few months ago dealing with minis in the game, and I thought so as well, that minis ruin your imagination...but they don't they just make things far easier. They were in the original AD&D and D&D as well, but not so incorporated. If you check the movement rates and distances of 1st edition AD&D people moved in inches (IIRC), and THAT really ruined imagination.
If you don't understand what is up with minis, try running a battle with them, it makes things so much easier. |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Marc
Senior Scribe
657 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2006 : 19:17:48
|
| Yeah I know things are easier for some battles, and it's hardly adaptable to various scenes, unless you are huge collector, so I use that paper things or whatever they're called, I even print the resized pictures from MMs and stick them to carton |
. |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2006 : 19:34:09
|
No collector...obsessive compulsive might be a better term...and since you use minis...of sorts...you know what the deal is  |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
LucianBarasu
Fellaren-Krae Co-ordinator
USA
214 Posts |
Posted - 26 Dec 2006 : 08:55:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alaundo
I've already stated that when a 4th edition is released, I will cease any further D&D core purchases. The thought of going through this all again...buying another PHB, DMG, MMI-?? etc. is very unappealing. I have more than enough core material to last me a lifetime. I'll still continue to purchase FR products, purely for the lore etc, however.
---I agree with Alaundo 100% I promised my self, a few years back, standing in a B.Dalton Bookstore, holding the 3rd edition Players handbook, "If I go through and replace all my books with 3rd edition and I see a 4th edition, I will be done collecting books". I still stand by that promise. Whether the rumor is true or not, I will stop buying core books and only continue to purchase FR lore books or supplements.
It took two acts of Congress, Three Magna Carta signings, two blood oaths, and a miracle from Ao to get my players to switch and learn 3.0/3.5 rules. IF I do see a 4th edition, I believe my Players who still wear their "I <3 ThAC0!" will smile proudly to see me pull out the AD&D books again and ignore anything other than lore beyond 2nd edition.
Something that someone else questioned above, made me stop and think.
"If D&D 3.5 is not selling, why make a new edition?"
With WotC being a big corporation and owned by Hasbro or whatever, They have to have people to look at the market and their products and say: "You know Miniatures are selling, and the demographic is X, but the new rules for D&D/FR are not selling, and since 3.0/3.5 we've made miniatures almost integral to the mechanics, maybe demographic X who buys miniatures are not the demographic that buys the D&D books. Maybe we should go back to basics and see where we went wrong."
Another thing someone previous said, Profits are key,This is also true.But with big companies, they hire people to see where the profits are lagging, and why... Maybe 4th edition will be like when Widen,Davis and Panzer bought the rights of Highlander after some idiots at the Film's Insurance company ruined Highlander 2 with a terrible sequel.
Either way. 3.5 is as far as I am going as far as core books go. I'll pick up stuff I know comes from FR or The talented writers I trust from 2nd and 3.5, but nothing else.
*digs out his "I<3ThAC0" shirt...getting ready* |
Lucian "The Bringer" Barasu
Fellaren Krae Project Co-Ordinator
"Why do you cry?"
"He is Conan, Cimmerian. He won't cry... So I cry for him."
|
|
|
|
silverwizard
Seeker
Greece
76 Posts |
Posted - 26 Dec 2006 : 11:10:30
|
When 4th Ed. comes out, I will do just what I did with 3.5: I will buy the PHB, and only if I want to participate in a campaign set in 4th as a player. If I decide to DM, I will ask my players to bring along their 2nd edition PHBs. I don't intend to buy any other core books.
I too wish WotC would release fluff-only setting-specific books, but I don't think it's gonna happen. I really can't say anything about the ratio of fluff to crunch in most 3E books, especially the latest ones, but I believe crunch and fluff will continue to go hand in hand, because this might maximise sales (e.g. both the crunch- and the fluff-lover will buy the same book for different reasons). Since lore is for me the only incentive to buy sourcebooks nowadays, I feel disappointed ("cheated" may be too strong a word) when I open a book and find out that half of it is full of feats, prestige classes, and spells, and (as a result) defficient in valuable lore. If this trend continues (and, as I already stated, I believe it will), WotC won't count me among their future customers. |
|
|
|
Victor_ograygor
Master of Realmslore
Denmark
1073 Posts |
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
|
|
Victor_ograygor
Master of Realmslore
Denmark
1073 Posts |
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36797 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2006 : 15:43:00
|
Now that the 4E discussions have been directed to this thread, allow me to once again state -- as a scribe, not a moderator -- that I feel it is pointless to discuss the pros and cons of 4E when we have no firm indications that it is coming.
Lime many of you, I've no desire to go out and buy more books. I have less desire to go out and buy books that are simply repackaged versions of existing lore.
But... Most people will agree that 3E was a huge step up from 2E. While 2E does still have its proponents, it must be said that many of the 2E mechanics have been simplified and/or better implemented in 3E.
None of us wants to buy new rules that are printed for the sake of printing new rules. But there was a serious amount of resistance when 3E was launched. I'm sure that when 2E was launched, there was much negative chatter on the Usenet boards about it. And I'm sure when 1E was launched, many diehard D&D people held court about the evils of TSR in their local FLGS. Most of those people were won over when they actually tried the new systems.
For better or worse, people resist change. But change will come. While we all hope it won't happen any time soon, we have to acknowledge that if we want WotC to keep giving us Realmslore, then they are going to have to support that by one day changing to 4E.
Until we know for certain that 4E is in development, I think people should withhold judgment on it. Just because it is yet another rule set doesn't mean it is going to be horrible, or that WotC is just trying to stick it to us. Until we have more information, we are just speculating -- and spending time worrying about something we can't change, instead of doing something more constructive like exploring the Realms or making some small corner of it our own.
This is the opinion of this (occasionally) humble* scribe. 
* (And more often, mischievous) |
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!  |
|
|
|
LucianBarasu
Fellaren-Krae Co-ordinator
USA
214 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2006 : 19:24:56
|
OKay, after reading Wooly's post, I tend to agree with everything he said. He makes valid points and it is pointless to throw around conjecture over 4th edition.
I agree with it all but one thing....
I don't want to be a lime!
(just a bit of humor to break the darkening thread) |
Lucian "The Bringer" Barasu
Fellaren Krae Project Co-Ordinator
"Why do you cry?"
"He is Conan, Cimmerian. He won't cry... So I cry for him."
|
|
|
|
RodOdom
Senior Scribe
USA
509 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2006 : 20:30:00
|
| What I'd love to see: the Realms sold to a company that Ed has strong creative control within. |
|
|
|
RodOdom
Senior Scribe
USA
509 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2006 : 20:40:59
|
| Thinking about it, Hasbro is a toy company. Their corporate bureaucracy understands toys and games, but probably not RPG, something that is a cross-between games, fantasy fiction and acting, and is acted out in the imagination rather than cards and plastic pieces. It would not be surprising if they want to ditch RPG rather than develop it. |
Edited by - RodOdom on 27 Dec 2006 20:43:54 |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2006 : 21:46:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by RodOdom
What I'd love to see: the Realms sold to a company that Ed has strong creative control within.
That would be a great idea, Sovereign Press/Margaret Weis has taken control over DragonLance, and they are releasing stuff... I can't judge on the quality of it since I haven't read any of the books, but I do assume, knowing a bunch of people involved in the company (including Margaret) that the stuff is good.
The problem with a new company is money. We know that Ed is still working in the library and he said that the revenues from his writing cannot support him all by themselves (If I understood his replies correctly). Margaret is a different league in terms of popularity and finances (or so it seems). Setting up such a company would be a tremendous task, and then let's not forget...how many people would want Realms books only containing lore and such.
We don't know TSRs and/Or Wizards sale numbers on the Realms items in general AND (more importantly) on the items that we deem not appropriate. We might be in the minority... |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31726 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2006 : 23:05:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
quote:
Originally posted by RodOdom
What I'd love to see: the Realms sold to a company that Ed has strong creative control within.
That would be a great idea, Sovereign Press/Margaret Weis has taken control over DragonLance, and they are releasing stuff... I can't judge on the quality of it since I haven't read any of the books, but I do assume, knowing a bunch of people involved in the company (including Margaret) that the stuff is good.
Well, most tend to be fairly well-researched, and written... especially those Margaret has either written or co-written.
|
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 |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 29 Dec 2006 : 09:32:03
|
Still, a fourth edition would most likely be redundant. And might not sell as well as 3/3.5 because people have invested a lot of money into the game. D&D means level oriented, the game will not go astray from xps and levels, there are enough level free systems out there, plus a non-xp-/level-system would not be D&D anymore.
The current system is the best level based system I've played...why change a winning team? |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Mumadar Ibn Huzal
Master of Realmslore
1338 Posts |
Posted - 29 Dec 2006 : 19:25:15
|
1st edition had a predominant US following but was small on a global scale
2nd edition became more World-Wide and had a wider following - partially beacuse of foreign based US soldiers taking the game (1e and 2e) across the US borders.
3e/3.5e definitely has brought a huge growth in the D&D fanbase on a global scale, bringing on board a whole new generation and one of the reasons (not the only one, but surely a big contributor) why for instance settings like the Forgotten Realms is still around.
4e might bring on board yet another new generation, thereby continuing the legacy of the Realms et al.
A lot of the comments in this thread sound familiar and are reminding me of the very human trait: resistance to change. One could do a search on Candlekeep to find the very similar ranting and raving on 3e and 3.5e when it was a (confirmed) rumor. Yet look how many members have come on board and have contributed to the growth of Candlekeep because of this new edition...
As to the question Why change a winning team? Because even a winning team is bound to lose in the long run. Stagnancy leads to decline, fresh things have to be brought forward, not only with new designers, but also with revised rules.
Will I buy 4e books? I don't know, if they are FR - probably. That is what I have done with 3e. A few core books for the basics, and the rest only FR. I have core, dragonlance and FR material aplenty from the 2e days. Not so for 3e/3.5e. That does not mean I dislike the core rules, or other settings; it only means that I have made a conscious decision to stick with the Realms regardless of the edition. |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 29 Dec 2006 : 20:18:18
|
I beg to differ, 1st edition was even translated into German back in 1983ish, it (1st edition) helped give birth to Das Schwarze Auge (The Dark Eye) Germany's best-selling RPG, Midgard one of the most thoughtthrough German RPGs still around. I don't want to bring back the memory of the cold war, but roleplaying gained momentum here in Germany at the end of the 70s, why else would there be a translation of the PHB, DMG and MM1 and 2 by 1984ish? The roleplaying scene here in Western Europe was already in existence way before 2nd edition was a glint in TSR's eyes. The fall of the iron curtain broadened the customerbase, yes, but to say D&D/AD&D and all the other games were only an American phenomenon is wrong. By the early 90s we had several scores of roleplaying game stores which were all doing quite well.
As for 3/3.5 bringing more players on board as a whole, I doubt it. My 5 year and running group started with 2nd edition, so whilst I was bringing new gamers "on board", they did not buy a single book from 3.5, up until the change of systems half a year ago, and I know of enough gamers who still play 2e. So if you subtract all the gamers that did not go with 3e and add the new gamers that might have joined (and in light of WoW and EQ and UO I highly doubt there have been that many more players) you might have the same numbers as before.
When 3e came out I bought the books. Out of sheer curiosity, hell all the people I hung out with a day before GenCon 2000 bought the book because they were curious, initial high sales can be attributed to that.
How shall a new edition gain more support from customers? People who do not play the game are not very likely to buy it anyway, unless their gaming friends prod them to gaming. In all honesty, we have to deal with the Nintendo generation now, the trend began with Nintendo and trading card games. People's attention span in general is very low now, or do you think you will be able to go into a computer games store and convince one of the kids, let alone 5 of them, to play D&D with you, sitting around a table and do nothing but talking and maybe, eventually throw some dice?
I've seen more people come to D&D now through the minis game...or at least try it out, but how do you want kids who rarely read and have the attention span of a fly get to read a 300 pages rulebook, when they have trouble with the cliff notes to Hamlet? |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Mumadar Ibn Huzal
Master of Realmslore
1338 Posts |
Posted - 29 Dec 2006 : 21:27:22
|
I don't dispute that RPG in general and D&D specific was not around outside of the US, just that it was even more limited in audience than nowadays.
One might be surprised if one would give it a try at a computer store... J.K. Rowling's publishers were also very suprised when Nintendo age kids who would not read a book thicker than a comics magazine started reading the Harry Potter books...
ps. eventhough the country listed under my name is where I currently reside and used to be on the Eastern side of the iron curtain, I am West European... |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 29 Dec 2006 : 23:44:07
|
| For the record, I've been interested in the Realms (and D&D)--and visiting this website--since before 3rd edition. Also, I could be wrong, but I don't think this website even had messageboards until somewhat recently (definitely after the arrival of 3rd edition), so I don't it's going to be accurate to attribute more messageboard members to 3rd edition. Not to mention that messageboard members are rarely an accurate sample of any given interest group. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 30 Dec 2006 : 08:39:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mumadar Ibn Huzal
One might be surprised if one would give it a try at a computer store... J.K. Rowling's publishers were also very suprised when Nintendo age kids who would not read a book thicker than a comics magazine started reading the Harry Potter books...
Maybe Harry Potter is a different issue, but I doubt those kids would sit down and read a "dry" rulebook. Hell, I prefer novels over sourcebooks, and I definitely didn't grow up with Nintendo.
A 4th edition might not have the success 3rd edition had. 3rd edition was necessary, AD&D had received no fundamental change ever since Gary Gygax wrote it. Sure it could have gone on as it was, but I'm not sure that sales would have warranted a continuation of the game, after all the lack of sales and return books from chains was what broke TSR's neck.
Many games have gone through lots of editions, Shadowrun, Rolemaster, Vampire. I haven't played any of those in the last few years hence I can't judge the changes, tho I think that the systems haven't changed that much (how many changes can you put into a freeform system like Vampire which relies much more on storytelling than roll-playing?)
D&D/AD&D was a dinosaur, systemwise. Sure, it still worked but like a dinosaur it was rather cumbersome. 3e/3.r is a cougar, sleek, elegant and very, very quick to learn. A new edition would have to be an improvement, and the only way to improve it would be getting rid of the levels and classes, which in turn would change the game so profoundly that it would no longer be D&D. |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
silverwizard
Seeker
Greece
76 Posts |
Posted - 30 Dec 2006 : 11:10:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
D&D/AD&D was a dinosaur, systemwise. Sure, it still worked but like a dinosaur it was rather cumbersome. 3e/3.r is a cougar, sleek, elegant and very, very quick to learn. A new edition would have to be an improvement, and the only way to improve it would be getting rid of the levels and classes, which in turn would change the game so profoundly that it would no longer be D&D.
Many fans of OOP editions view 3.X as cumbersome, what with the vast amount of rules and everything.
You are right about classes and levels, though. Taking these away would mean transforming D&D into something else. I personally can't agree with D&D players who demand changes of such magnitude. I tell them to ditch D&D altogether, and go play another game that is not based on classes and levels. |
Edited by - silverwizard on 31 Dec 2006 17:41:33 |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 30 Dec 2006 : 11:18:31
|
| Truth be told, I don't understand the complaint about 3.x being too cumbersome. It has one general rule: d20+modifier for everything but damage, the rest is extra dressing which still boils down to d20+modifier. *shrug* Each to his own, I don't wanna go back. |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 30 Dec 2006 : 15:47:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
The current system is the best level based system I've played...why change a winning team?
D&D may be a good gamist system, the problem is that FR should be played with a narrativist system if you want it more "Ed style".
The real problem is to find a narrativist system that supports "high fantasy" like we have in FR....
|
|
|
|
Asgetrion
Master of Realmslore
Finland
1564 Posts |
Posted - 30 Dec 2006 : 19:05:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
The current system is the best level based system I've played...why change a winning team?
D&D may be a good gamist system, the problem is that FR should be played with a narrativist system if you want it more "Ed style".
The real problem is to find a narrativist system that supports "high fantasy" like we have in FR....
Hmmm... I think most narrativist systems support "high fantasy" - they are quite "rules-light", so I don't see why you could not use them in FR? |
"What am I doing today? Ask me tomorrow - I can be sure of giving you the right answer then."
-- Askarran of Selgaunt, Master Sage, speaking to a curious merchant, Year of the Helm |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
First 4E serious rumor
Topic Locked
