| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
 Posted - 31 May 2008 : 23:00:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bakra
No they are not idiots. <snip> I would like to point out that some of the game designers have been in the business a lot longer than some of us have been breathing.
Rich Baker has been in the industry since 1991 that is 17 years of non-idiocy game designing. I have two new players in my gaming group, one is 14 the other just turned 16, I would be ashamed if they came here and called him or any other WotC employee an idiot because they dislike the new rules.
Thats the whole problem.
Rich Baker is a good author game designer. Bruce Cordell is also a good author and excellent game designer (even if I do feel his personal tastes do not belong in FR). Chris Perkins is an excellent designer as well - I don't know if he's written any fiction).
It just doesn't make sense to most of us how a group of talented and intelligent men could have come up with all the changes they did - changes that make little or no sense, and go out of their way to alienate their entire fan base.
Its completely illogical. I suppose we could say there's something in the air at the WotC offices that has caused some sort of group temporary insanity, but I doubt that. The other thing would be to say they really thought this was the right way to go, which was either very egotistical (perhaps) or stupid (which I doubt).
I have thought of yet another option, but its so extreme that its beyond belief (even moreso then 4e FR itself).
Anyhow, had they been idiots, then we could understand, but its because of who they are that just leaves us shaking our heads. This past year must be one of the worst PR campaigns in history. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 31 May 2008 23:57:58 |
 |
|
|
SirUrza
Master of Realmslore
USA
1283 Posts |
Posted - 31 May 2008 : 23:46:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bakra
No they are not idiots. The first time it was mentioned that 3.5 may not be possible to convert was in the early stages of 4e. And guess what?
Wrong.
They came out publicly and said there would be conversion guidelines, they back pedaled 2 days later. If I cared enough I'd dig up the video interview from GenCon last year of them saying so and then the web post they did retracting it.
AD&D and 3e are completely different games yet guess what exists. Conversion guidelines.
quote:
Originally posted by BakraThings changed since the first time the topic came up.
The only thing that changed is they got lazy. The game remained the same from Game Day on which was only a few months after GenCon. It's impossible that so much of the game changed in that time.
quote:
Originally posted by BakraWill we ever see an official conversion document from WotC? No clue. Why doesn’t someone ask in a polite non-snarky way on their message boards?
Why not come off your high horse and stop being blind to the nonsense that comes out of WOTC. I bet the next thing you're going to tell me is you don't have fun playing D&D 3e right? Because that's what WOTC has been telling us for 2 years now.
quote:
Originally posted by BakraAnd reading your conversion, it doesn’t sound that easy to me. If you start having to rely on percentages in order to find the characters placement on the level advancement table it is not simple anymore.
I'm sorry to hear 6th grade math is beyond you. Why not stick to a card game, like Solitaire.
quote:
Originally posted by BakraYou said it yourself, the skills have changed, the feats have changed, the abilities have changed, you failed to mention magic has changed and the little thing called powers. It is easier to end the 3.5 edition and start with the new one.
Again, AD&D was a COMPLETELY different game, yet it has conversion guidelines.
4e is closer AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN closer to 3e then AD&D ever way. The skill system is similar. The feat system is similar. Attributes are similar.
And guess what my innocently naive blind friend, when converting from AD&D to 3E, most of the spells didn't convert over, you just picked new ones based on your limit in 3.0. Just like skills. Just like Proficiencies.
quote:
Originally posted by BakraI would like to point out that some of the game designers have been in the business a lot longer than some of us have been breathing.
Yeah and you know how many of those aging game designers you seem to revere so much actually worked on 3.0 or even AD&D? I'll give you a guess, you can count them on one hand and you won't even use all you're fingers. Most of the people working on D&D started at or after 3.5 and have shown a clear pattern of little to no regard with what came before.
quote:
Originally posted by BakraRich Baker has been in the industry since 1991 that is 17 years of non-idiocy game designing. I have two new players in my gaming group, one is 14 the other just turned 16, I would be ashamed if they came here and called him or any other WotC employee an idiot because they dislike the new rules.
*yawn*
I'm sure your 14 and 16 year old call their friends worse then idiots that you should be more embarrassed about. And who said anything about disliking the new rules?
What I dislike is the continued disrespect for people that have been playing this game longer then most of these guys have worked for WOTC.
|
"Evil prevails when good men fail to act."
The original and unapologetic Arilyn, Aribeth, Seoni Fanboy. |
Edited by - SirUrza on 01 Jun 2008 00:20:53 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jun 2008 : 00:29:34
|
I'm not a mod or nuthin'...
but its gettin' mighty warm in here, pardners - lets all take a deep breath.
Bottom line is they DO NOT WANT people to continure playing legacy games - that would mean NO setting sales. New edition, new setting - thats where they want everyone's heads at.
Then next year, they want everyone to jump ship again a start playing in the next setting. If the DDi lives up to their expectations (no comment), we will be getting FR info UNTIL Eberron is released, at which time THAT SETTING will step to the forefront, and all FR lore will take a backseat to Eberron's.
That is the plan - they have explaned it to us several times over. Nobody is drawing any conclusions here that WotC hasn't already imbedded in our heads. The biggest sellers are the DMG, PHB, MM, and settings books, and now that is pretty much all they want to produce.
It's called 'planned obsolescence', and I never thought I'd see the day that gross business concept crept into the RPG industry. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 01 Jun 2008 22:54:32 |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jun 2008 : 00:31:24
|
Well, Bill Slavisek (sp?) has been in the industry a long time... but that's beside the point. My guess is that Hasbro put their boots down. Make D&D earn more money or lose your job, that's the motto, I think. Maybe they wanna get younger fans, most of the folks I play with have been playing longer than Rich Baker has been in the industry, but here I thought 3e's goal was that as well. The main problem is rather this: even with a starter set people interested in the game might not want to run it, because the (uh-)holy trinity of PHB, DMG and MM looming at the horizon. Most kids don't like to read. Instead of abandoning 3e they should've called it AD&D again, and developed a D&D 'lite' that gets people interested and playing until they are ready to read three 280+ books.
D&D minis could have been such a jumping board as it had 'lite' rules, glue some character advancement and story-xp to that and release a bunch of dungeon builds with story. That would've gotten kids onboard easier than the whole trinity thing. 4e still is not simple, if it were the PHB would contain 20 pages, the DMG maybe 40 (most for magic items), and the MM would be gone since you have statcards... on second thought maybe a MM that explains the stat-card powers, still it would be less than 60 pages, no monsterlore, just stat-explanations for the minigame. If you wanna get fresh blood you have to offer them something that gets them away from WoW and stuff, not let them stay there! |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jun 2008 : 03:38:49
|
Let's try to keep things a little more civil in this discussion folks. Some of the more recent posts have certainly been treading close to the Code of Conduct.
|
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 |
|
|
|
Odysseus
Seeker
USA
51 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jun 2008 : 13:24:23
|
I Dm'd my first 4E game last night. And here are my first few impressions.
4E is a lot like a trading card game. I can see kids trying to trade for a fireball card so that his wizard can have it as one of his powers etc. And Mace's comment earlier in the thread about kids not wanting to read, struck home. As I don't think you really need the books to play, just power cards.
From a players point of view 4E doesn't look better than 3rd ED, it doesn't look much more streamlined than 3E , although easier to get into. The implied/core setting is very unappealing.In fact it fealt like the monsters we're fighting the X-men not a party of adventurers. From a DM's point of view it was easier to run higher level monsters, which is a big plus.
I can't see a RPG reason for the Realms changes. And the plug and play style of rules is crying out for someone to write a great setting for 4E.
ps
Even though the PC had all those extra hit points and healing surges. They still seemed to get knock down pretty easily. Not as easily as 1st level characters. But it didn't seem a problem.
Conversion. I don't see any problem with converting old modules/adventures to 4E. Converting PCs maybe. I have a suspicion that 4E level is more about how powerful the character is a combat. So converting a more roleplay character would probably convert to a lower level. Rogue/skill monkey characters might be hard to convert. |
“Anybody can become angry, that is easy; but to be angry with the right person, and to the right degree, and at the right time, and for the right purpose, and in the right way, that is not within everybody’s power, that is not easy.” —Aristotle |
Edited by - Odysseus on 01 Jun 2008 14:14:39 |
|
|
|
Ayunken-vanzan
Senior Scribe
Germany
657 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jun 2008 : 14:14:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Odysseus
I Dm'd my first 4E game last night. And here are my first few impressions.
4E is a lot like a trading card game.
This seems to confirm some speculations about 4ed being influenced by Magic the Gathering appearing earlier in this thread. |
"What mattered our lives now? When our world had been torn from us? Folk wept, or drank, or stood staring out over the land, wondering what new horror each dawn would bring."
Elender Stormfall of Suzail
"Anyone can kill deities, cause plagues, or destroy organizations. It takes real skill to make them live on."
Varl
FR/D&D-Links • 2ed Downloads |
|
|
|
Cyria
Acolyte
20 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jun 2008 : 19:16:45
|
I haven't had time to fully read the rules yet, but looking at the MM I've discovered something that's disproportionately annoying. I know this is subjective, I know it should only be a minor issue - but I can't help it, the sheer number of compound words makes me grind my teeth. It's so jarring and artificial to me, somehow. Emberguard, blazesteel, hailscourge, rimehammer, dartswarmer, warthorn, earthrage, thunderfury, visejaw, feymire, runescribe, blackspawn gloomweb (the spawn definitely win the compound game), spiretop, shadowspinner... and that's only a few of the words I see when browsing the MM up to the end of the letter D. Ah, the sweet simplicity of the cyclops hewer and unhurried pronunciation of the briar witch dryad (they didn't make it a briarwitch! I'm shocked).
Did WOTC have trouble with the art budget, though? While a lot of the art is nice, quite a few of the MM pictures seem familiar to me. |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jun 2008 : 22:55:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
agreed, good explanation, DC 15 is common knowledge, 20 is expert
this is full bear lore (was amusing, unrelated with the overall feeling I get that 4e will fall)
quote:
Bear Lore
A character knows the following information with a successful
Nature check.
DC 15: Bears generally live in forests and caves. Cave
bears are ferocious predators that make their lairs deep
underground and are accustomed to darkness. Dire bears
are savage hunters that eat humanoids as readily as game
animals.
DC 20: Dire bears typically maul prey with their claws or
crush them to death with their thick, bestial arms.
tough 1st level characters are now super heroes and I haven't seen nothing on commoners yet, guess they aren't intended for roleplaying !?
Hmmm, I'm surprised it didn't mention that most bears are omnivorous. |
"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) |
Edited by - Rinonalyrna Fathomlin on 01 Jun 2008 22:58:17 |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jun 2008 : 23:08:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
It's called 'planned obsolescence', and I never thought I'd see the day that gross business concept crept into the RPG industry.
Hasn't that kind of already been here for a while now? When a new edition comes out, WotC knows it's not going to last forever. |
"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) |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jun 2008 : 23:10:20
|
Damn you Mace - you stole my joke. 
I haven't seen the rules yet, but I've heard a lot. Unfortunately, its not easy to make unbiased decision to begin with, and having second-hand informationmakes it only worse.
It does seem to me that the system does have that 'modular' feel that trading card games have. Also, the paths (magical and otherwise) appear to be much more restrictive, which is also in keeping with a 'card game' mentality. A spell can no longer do many things, it does specific things in specific situations... at least that is the feel I'm getting.
I also heard that magic works exactly like physical combat now, so spells are just fancy long-range weapons. That means playing a Wizard now feels pretty much the same as running a fighter. Each class has different names for their abilities, buit in the end, they all pret much do the same things... and everybdy can pretty much do what everyone else can (like heal).
I was lal for streamlining the 3e rules, but it seems they have taken it a bit too far, and now everyhting ion the game feels like everything else.
I stil plan on checking them out though, and hopefully they haven't really ruined D&D as so many are saying. Since I feel you don't even need the rules (like Gary G. said), then even the miniature rules should work for a DM who wants to Roleplay.
The monsters sound to me like they used a name-generation cghart from an old issue of Dragon - just roll dice and put two 'cool' sounding words together. I also don't like how they re-imagined some of te clasic monster-types (Lamia are a 'swarm' creature now?). After what they did to the Displacer beast in 3e (you know... that anorexic Kitty) nothing should surprise me anymore. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jun 2008 : 23:16:35
|
| Yeah, I have to admit the new Lamia is pretty...odd. |
"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) |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jun 2008 : 23:19:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Hasn't that kind of already been here for a while now? When a new edition comes out, WotC knows it's not going to last forever.
Yes, but with this "One setting per year paradigm", it is much more obvious, and we are expected to turn to something new every year, rather then every decade or so, as it was in the past.
Also, before when we got another PHB, or a DMG, it was a nice surprise... now we are expected to buy a new one evry single year. It can be argued that we will be getting less splat books and setting-specific books so it all balances out, but at least before we didn't feel like we were being 'milked'.
I don't mind a company taking me to the bank, but at least don't be so blatant about it by naming the books I, II, II, Iv, etc, etc, ad infinitum. Its like they aren't even trying anymore - the few books that have names other then PHB, DMG, and MM are all taken from 2nd and 3rd edition books!
There was a time when we felt like we were getting something worthwhile with every purchase, even when deep down we knew TSR was only putting this stuff out to make profit. Now they slap us in the face with the fact its all being done for profit, and unashamedly so.
Like I said in another thread, "I like to be kissed before I'm f....". |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 01 Jun 2008 23:22:54 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36906 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2008 : 13:50:01
|
They discuss alignment in the new preview.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20080602a
Here's a small part of it:
quote:
As we saw it, several issues plagued D&D alignment, including:
1. A character’s alignment, chosen at character creation, can become a straight-jacket on that character’s actions. Consider the paladin we’ve all seen in play, “I had to attack the rogue, I’m lawful good,” or the rogue, “I’m chaotic good! That means sometimes I push you off the bridge; come on, don’t get mad!” or some similar sentiment when presented with a role-playing choice. For this reason, many characters stuck with neutral: a nebulous self-serving alignment (as was then defined), a “me first” mentality that didn’t necessarily promote party cohesion either.
2. In 3rd Edition, choosing an alignment usually had the unfortunate mechanical repercussion of making the aligned player vulnerable to an opposing aligned attack of a foe. It’s not really ideal that being good made you more vulnerable to demonic attacks, for instance. Another reason some players stuck with the neutral alignment of previous editions.
3. The alignment system was tied to game cosmology, in ways that sometimes translated to physical effects that didn’t lead to fun gameplay.
Okay...
1. Alignment is a straight-jacket? Gods, it has never been a straight-jacket, and they said as much in prior editions. Did they not even read their own rulebooks?
2. Oh, noes! Being a good guy might make you vulnerable to demonic attack? Gosh, we can't have that! Having a bad guy able to smite someone the way some good guys can is simply too unfair.
3. Alignment having physical effects? Huh? I don't really recall this, but they mention it as part of the cosmology. Well, that's part of the game. If it's dangerous for good guys to visit a particular Lower Plane, then either they don't need to be there, or they need to take the appropriate preparations. It's certainly not a big enough deal to justify the change. Besides, I don't expect the Nine Hells to be a place safe for picnics and Hello Kitty cartoons. |
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! |
|
|
|
Kajehase
Great Reader
Sweden
2104 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2008 : 14:14:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Besides, I don't expect the Nine Hells to be a place safe for picnics and Hello Kitty cartoons.
Picnics I agree with you on, but as for Hello Kitty cartoons I suspect that the Nine Hells is exactly where they originated... |
There is a rumour going around that I have found god. I think is unlikely because I have enough difficulty finding my keys, and there is empirical evidence that they exist.
Terry Pratchett |
Edited by - Kajehase on 02 Jun 2008 14:15:06 |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2008 : 15:56:58
|
I've never chosen an alignment based on whether the alignment I chose would make me vulnerable to certain types of attacks. That rather defeats the whole purpose.
Alignment is only a straight-jacket if one makes it that way. |
"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) |
|
|
|
Ayunken-vanzan
Senior Scribe
Germany
657 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2008 : 16:17:49
|
| This seems to be a case of: "We have to let look the old edition as bad as possibly so that the new shines even more." Or as with the chosen: people have certain (false) concepts about alignment, so we have to change the thing instead of correct the assumed concept. |
"What mattered our lives now? When our world had been torn from us? Folk wept, or drank, or stood staring out over the land, wondering what new horror each dawn would bring."
Elender Stormfall of Suzail
"Anyone can kill deities, cause plagues, or destroy organizations. It takes real skill to make them live on."
Varl
FR/D&D-Links • 2ed Downloads |
|
|
|
Ayunken-vanzan
Senior Scribe
Germany
657 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2008 : 16:23:23
|
quote:
* Good: Freedom and kindness.
* Lawful Good: Civilization and order.
* Evil: Tyranny and hatred.
* Chaotic Evil: Entropy and destruction.
* Unaligned: Having no alignment; not taking a stand.
So no judges any more (lawful neutral), and of course no big bad meanies (lawful evil - from all evil alignments the one which is easiest to understand, I think). "The old system is too complicated to understand, so it has to be dumbed down to a few selected choices."  |
"What mattered our lives now? When our world had been torn from us? Folk wept, or drank, or stood staring out over the land, wondering what new horror each dawn would bring."
Elender Stormfall of Suzail
"Anyone can kill deities, cause plagues, or destroy organizations. It takes real skill to make them live on."
Varl
FR/D&D-Links • 2ed Downloads |
Edited by - Ayunken-vanzan on 02 Jun 2008 16:23:56 |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2008 : 17:18:47
|
| In case anyone is interested, there is a new 4e promotion by Scott Kurtz (from PvP), Mike Krahulik ("Gabe" from Penny Arcade) and Jerry Holkins ("Tycho" from Penny Arcade). It is in the form of a podcast of them playing a 4e adventure with Chris Perkins as the DM and two one-panel comics (one by Scott and one by Gabe). This is supposed to be the first in a series, but I am not sure how many the total series will contain. Also, it should be noted that there is strong language used in the podcast. |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
Edited by - Hawkins on 02 Jun 2008 17:20:11 |
|
|
|
Cyria
Acolyte
20 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2008 : 19:12:34
|
quote:
2. In 3rd Edition, choosing an alignment usually had the unfortunate mechanical repercussion of making the aligned player vulnerable to an opposing aligned attack of a foe. It�s not really ideal that being good made you more vulnerable to demonic attacks, for instance. Another reason some players stuck with the neutral alignment of previous editions.
Whoa. If being evil makes enemies more vulnerable to attacks by good enemies, well, why shouldn't it work the other way around? Or does 4E have demons that suffer no extra damage from holy weapons? I don't have a problem with some characters being more vulnerable to certain effects. I had a paladin PC for the fun of playing the ideal knight and while she never got to high enough level to face foes with Sword of Good Girl Bane +5, I would have been perfectly okay with it if the DM had thrown a Bane +1 in my direction. It's a price the PC is willing to pay for her smite evil ability. Again, this seems to be a sign that the 4E developers just happen to have different demands when it comes to fun. I don't want to find a rust monster in every dungeon and cellar, but occasional situations when my PC (paladin, mage, class X) simply can't deliver damage the way other PCs can? Perfectly okay. I trust the DMs I play with to allow us all chances to shine every now and then, and if I find a way to beat the odds and excel in an unfavourable situation, that makes the PC more heroic. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36906 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2008 : 21:11:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
In case anyone is interested, there is a new 4e promotion by Scott Kurtz (from PvP), Mike Krahulik ("Gabe" from Penny Arcade) and Jerry Holkins ("Tycho" from Penny Arcade). It is in the form of a podcast of them playing a 4e adventure with Chris Perkins as the DM and two one-panel comics (one by Scott and one by Gabe). This is supposed to be the first in a series, but I am not sure how many the total series will contain. Also, it should be noted that there is strong language used in the podcast.
I saw that... I like both PVP and Penny Arcade, but I'm not so fond of Scott Kurtz. And with my lack of interest in 4E, I'm passing on the podcast. |
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! |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36906 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2008 : 21:12:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayunken-vanzan
This seems to be a case of: "We have to let look the old edition as bad as possibly so that the new shines even more." Or as with the chosen: people have certain (false) concepts about alignment, so we have to change the thing instead of correct the assumed concept.
There seems to be a lot of that going around.  |
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! |
|
|
|
ShadezofDis
Senior Scribe
402 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2008 : 21:37:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
There seems to be a lot of that going around.
And to be fair, one has to deal with the perception of "outsiders", even if the perception is completely false.
I just really, REALLY dislike how they've dealt with it. |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2008 : 23:44:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayunken-vanzan
quote:
* Good: Freedom and kindness.
* Lawful Good: Civilization and order.
* Evil: Tyranny and hatred.
* Chaotic Evil: Entropy and destruction.
* Unaligned: Having no alignment; not taking a stand.
So no judges any more (lawful neutral), and of course no big bad meanies (lawful evil - from all evil alignments the one which is easiest to understand, I think). "The old system is too complicated to understand, so it has to be dumbed down to a few selected choices."
To be fair, those characters are still there, they would just fall into different categories.
I'm not saying I love this new system, though--I think they should have just had good, unaligned, and evil. |
"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) |
|
|
|
Ergdusch
Master of Realmslore
Germany
1720 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jun 2008 : 08:32:59
|
quote:
* Good: Freedom and kindness.
* Lawful Good: Civilization and order.
* Evil: Tyranny and hatred.
* Chaotic Evil: Entropy and destruction.
* Unaligned: Having no alignment; not taking a stand.
Alignment remodeled - another thing I don't quite understand and one more reason for me to leave my hands off of those 4th ed. books.
BTW, as I read the article they argue that the change of the alignment scale was neccissary due to 'roleplaying difficulties' on the players part?! IMO, it cannot be (and to me and my players never was) too difficult to find a way to be true to your alignment and still play the game in a moderate way and that i't s fun for everyone at the table, even without all the players being neutral in alingment. Again they seem to take away parts of the game that gave it it's name: roleplaying. Or is it rather Rollplaying nowadays?
Anyhow, one a side note - if they erase LE what will the bloodwar between devils and demons be about? At the least it can no longer mean law vs chaos...
|
"Das Gras weht im Wind, wenn der Wind weht." |
Edited by - Ergdusch on 03 Jun 2008 08:40:55 |
|
|
|
Quale
Master of Realmslore
1757 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jun 2008 : 11:40:12
|
| they erased the blood war too |
|
|
|
Ergdusch
Master of Realmslore
Germany
1720 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jun 2008 : 12:01:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
they erased the blood war too
Oh! 
Well, such an approach (change something and erase/disregard all that is connected with it) makes it rather easy to to implement changes! I was aware that the 4th Ed. designers team did this at some points but to simply erase such lore as the BLOODWAR!?
I am speechless! *shakes head*  |
"Das Gras weht im Wind, wenn der Wind weht." |
Edited by - Ergdusch on 03 Jun 2008 14:21:57 |
|
|
|
Alisttair
Great Reader
Canada
3054 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jun 2008 : 13:37:13
|
| I also find it absurd that they revamp the alignment system. The old system worked. Why fix something that isn't broken. This is like what they are doing to the realms. Trying to make something easier for the few who just don't get it. (IMO) |
Karsite Arcanar (Most Holy Servant of Karsus)
Anauria - Survivor State of Netheril as penned by me:
http://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/172023 |
|
|
|
Alisttair
Great Reader
Canada
3054 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jun 2008 : 13:38:34
|
| The old system also helped define the blood war. It's easier to understand. More clear cut. I just don't understand the point of this change. |
Karsite Arcanar (Most Holy Servant of Karsus)
Anauria - Survivor State of Netheril as penned by me:
http://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/172023 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
D&D 4e Discussion Scroll
