Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Am I all alone?


D&D 4th Edition (and Beyond)

101 to 150 of 165 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Modules Subscriber
Snorter wrote:
You have to go to ENWorld to find info on 4E, which should be freely available on WOTC own site?

Actually, I go to ENWorld because Wizards' site is blocked at my workplace. Also because since 3E was launching, they've been the "news" site rather than the manufacturer's own marketing site. Also because Wizards.com as a web site leaves much to be desired from a visuals-and-navigation perspective.

And I can't argue with anything you say. WotC has completely flubbed the marketing so far, and the online "magazines" are a joke. None of which invalidates my distaste for the ongoing anti-4E rhetoric, with (from some people) the attitude that if you disagree with me, you must be an idiot.

Forgottenprince wrote:

As for Paizo products, please don't let the posts drive you away from good products. I like Paizo, its staff, and their products. They have always treated me kindly/professionally. To my knowledge, Paizo has not expressed statements to which you objected earlier. To stop buying from them JUST because of the boards is the equivalent of me not buying from WOTC JUST because of Gleemax (instead of my other reasons). I think your husband has the right idea.

I absolutely agree with what you say here - and in fact, this is the exact conversation my husband and I had about this, and the exact conclusion we came to.

But my point still stands. My frustration with the boards was bleeding over into my ability to appreciate the products. And if that can happen to me, a person who has been a Paizo customer and messageboard-regular for a pretty long time now, it can certainly affect other people with less reason to shop Paizo.

Let me give another example. I was surfing both ENWorld and Gleemax a couple of months ago, I guess - around the time of Erik Mona's "4.0: PAIZO IS STILL UNDECIDED" post. There were threads actively mocking this community because (paraphrasing the message, not quoting a specific thread) "those guys on the Paizo Boards are on the warpath" and "Paizo's becoming the home for every 3.5-or-die grognard."

Here's the thing. If the OGL ever becomes available, and works, and Paizo switches - how many of the people who spend most of their time at ENWorld or Gleemax, instead of here, are going to have a negative reaction to the idea of Pathfinder, and not even look at it, because of exposure to those threads. There are going to be some people who just retain a general sense of negativity about Paizo as a company, and/or Paizo's products, because of that sort of message having been out there. There are also going to be some people who retain an impression of Paizo (not the community on these boards, but the company itself) as anti-4E. So those people aren't going to be as likely to look at 4E Pathfinder products because they'll retain that concept. Even if it is only a relative handful of people, say a few dozen or a couple of hundred, that's huge in this market. And that's a real disservice to the company that we all love.


I want to thank Forgottenprince and Snorter for making all of the points I wanted to (plus more) in a much more civil tone than I would have.

I actually tried to reply to Cintra Bristol three times, but had to stop on each when I realized I was only adding fuel to the fire when that really wasn't my intentions.

Thanks guys/gals.

Cheliax

Cintra Bristol, maybe it's just me, but I haven't really seen personal "attacks" on people that are pro-4E. I have seen and participated in a lot of discussions that elaborate on our serious reservations about the direction 4th edition is taking our beloved hobby. Yes, we have done some WotC bashing. Who can blame us after what they did to the magazines, and the way they are spitting on 30+ years of lore and tradition, and treating us like sheep instead of valued customers? Maybe you are just taking some of the anit-4E discussions a little too personally. No one's going to fault you for liking 4E. Most of us are just saying that 4E is not for us, and are lamenting the fact that there most likely will be no more official support for 3.5 after the release of 4.0.

Cheliax

To answer Snorter's question. I beleive that Dungeon 151(if you can call it that with a straight face)is done, but there is still no compiled pdf of it. 152 only has one article and one adventure so far. So they are still completely failing to deliver even a sub-par product with sparse content by their deadline.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Cinta,

The only 'anti-4e' sentiment I see here is either a general dislike of the choices WotC are making in design and direction, and a bit of sadistic enjoyment when someone on the 4.0 bandwagon finds their ox is being gored now.

We do have our share of bomb throwers (Razz, I'm looking at you) but they're being thrown on both sides of the line. Many of the aspects of 4.x do not apeal to me. I do wish WotC success in their plans, and I hope someone, beside me, contonues to design 3.x stuff.

Their plans however, do not include me.

So far, their online marketing has been a disaster. I think all but the most dedicated corporate type can agree on that. Digital Dragon's a wrymling, and Digital Dungeon is a 10'X10' room with an orc and a pie.

As much as I hope Paizo's 3rd path is 3.x I know converting to 4th is likely inevitable. Game Mastery will likely go first, and with that I will drop my subscription. Pathfinder I'll wait and see how backwards compatible it is before I decide. I'd love to buy Paizo, Green Ronin, Necromancer products but I won't buy 4th edition. Maybe I'm a grognard then, but my group and I see no reason to jump to a new game system.

And make no mistake, to me 4.x is a bigger jump than 2.x to 3.x was. Static save targets, recharge powers, no vancian magic, radically changed core cosmology, blowing up the realms. Changing the meaning of the words Tieflings and Eladrin, consigning classes to limbo (bards, druids) for at least a year, and hosing psionics (again!) have made D&D (for it is still D&D, even if that term has no meaning) something I won't recognize.

So crack open my PHB, bring me my Arcana Unearthed, and let my dragonborn (Dracha with the serial numbers filed off) my tiefling spell stalker and my human legionary storm Castle Greyhawk with my Apnu ranger.

Cheliax Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Cintra Bristol wrote:


And I can't argue with anything you say. WotC has completely flubbed the marketing so far, and the online "magazines" are a joke. None of which invalidates my distaste for the ongoing anti-4E rhetoric, with (from some people) the attitude that if you disagree with me, you must be an idiot.

My impression lately is that (a) that behavior has gone down and (b) to a certain extent, you just have to ignore it. There are definitely more anti-4e people here than ENWorld or WotC, but I still think they are not all that virulent. They tend to be more hyperbolic than attack oriented (e.g., "All these changes are dumb and nobody likes them" rather than "You are dumb because you like this"). You can get offended at such a poorly reasoned statement, but it's also pretty easy just to shake off and ignore. It's hard to find an internet based discussion of D&D without something similar or worse coming across the bow (and on other boards, you tend to see such sentiments embedded in people's signatures as well).

Anyway, there is a pro-4e community here and they rarely get attacked directly unless they swing first. It'd be nice to have more members in that community, so I hope you will stick around and increase the frequency with which you post. What Paizo needs more of is 4e advocates who are willing to post their thoughts without trying to convert those who don't want to be converted.

I guess that's the line for me these days. I spent 3-4 months getting into tussles with people twisting every word WotC says into the worst possible light and making grandiose statements suggesting they knew the heart and mind of every gamer on the planet as well as how to properly run a business, and all it did was engender more bad feelings. So, now I leave those posters to be loud and ignorant on their own and just try and keep offering a perspective that is not based on the assumption that because something is related to 4e it is inherently bad and wrong.

You're not alone and I hope you continue to post here so that I'm not alone either.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Modules Subscriber

Thanks, everybody. I'm feeling better now.

No, seriously - having folks reply to me and take me seriously (even if some can't completely see where I'm coming from) is really helpful. Because I'm well aware that if I'd posted something equivalent to this at ENWorld, or (gods forbid) at Gleemax, the signal-to-noise ratio I'd have gotten back would have been really, really bad.

Here, it's a two-way conversation. On a public messageboard. Amazing!

(Group hug!)

Sebastian, you mentioned that it would be nice to have more people posting from amidst the pro-4E community here. I'll admit, that's where I'm guilty. I've been feeling afraid to post for a long time because I felt that my "optimism" would just draw arguments/attacks. But that's no way to make other people like me feel welcome here, either, is it?

So I hereby promise that I'll try to grow a backbone and start contributing a bit of enthusiasm, rather than waiting until I'm all depressed and irritable and posting a diatribe again...


Anyhow there's no point of being shy on the internet. It's so impersonal. I never worry too much about what people say about my comments. I don't know them and they don't know me.

I do agree that this board feels very anti 4E, more so than I expected. It was a bit of a shocker to see how sensitive and nostalgic a lot of people are when it comes to changes to the game. I'm not saying I support 4E because I haven't actually seen it or played it yet, but I am looking forward to checking it out, and though there are things I don't think I will like about it, I'm optimistic that it will be an improvement over the previous systems.

Dnd was after all one of the orginal rpgs, and rpg design has come a long way in the last 30 years. I don't think dnd has ever been one of the better systems in terms of mechanics, though it is fun. It makes perfect sense to overhall it.

Cintra Bristol wrote:

Thanks, everybody. I'm feeling better now.

No, seriously - having folks reply to me and take me seriously (even if some can't completely see where I'm coming from) is really helpful. Because I'm well aware that if I'd posted something equivalent to this at ENWorld, or (gods forbid) at Gleemax, the signal-to-noise ratio I'd have gotten back would have been really, really bad.

Here, it's a two-way conversation. On a public messageboard. Amazing!

(Group hug!)

Sebastian, you mentioned that it would be nice to have more people posting from amidst the pro-4E community here. I'll admit, that's where I'm guilty. I've been feeling afraid to post for a long time because I felt that my "optimism" would just draw arguments/attacks. But that's no way to make other people like me feel welcome here, either, is it?

So I hereby promise that I'll try to grow a backbone and start contributing a bit of enthusiasm, rather than waiting until I'm all depressed and irritable and posting a diatribe again...

Andoran

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Disenchanter wrote:

I want to thank Forgottenprince and Snorter for making all of the points I wanted to (plus more) in a much more civil tone than I would have...

Thanks guys/gals.

No problem and thank you.


Not alone!

I'm enthusastically awaiting 4E for a variety of reasons.

Everything I've heard so far regarding mechanics addresses something that's annoyed me with 3x or is about something whose changes matters naught to me either way.

Also, I'm less attached to tradition than others seem to be. Yes, tradition is a valid reason to maintain something--but I would argue that it's the least valid reason--in a rules system, in this industry, in this market. Rules, especially in this industry, need to evolve.

- ~ -

As to the Paizo boards resulting in Paizo being equated with a kind of grognard central, I agree. One good thing is that only a fraction of any customer base ever visits any forum, and only a fraction of that is ever sufficiently familiar with the community there for activities on that forum to have any real impact.

But what worries me is that the people who're in the industry, the professionals in the industry I mean, do read the boards and are sensitive to reputation. If Paizo gets the reputation as "Grognard Central" then that will harm them because grognard is a derisive and marginalizing term and something, I would argue, not to wave about as a banner.

I want Paizo to enjoy mainstream happy success with growing group of new customers, not marginalized survival eked out by catering to an increasingly marginalized group. The entire industry is niche enough as it is. Therefore, I hope it embraces 4E--and its customers do too.

Andoran

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Cintra Bristol wrote:

Thanks, everybody. I'm feeling better now.

No, seriously - having folks reply to me and take me seriously (even if some can't completely see where I'm coming from) is really helpful. Because I'm well aware that if I'd posted something equivalent to this at ENWorld, or (gods forbid) at Gleemax, the signal-to-noise ratio I'd have gotten back would have been really, really bad.

Here, it's a two-way conversation. On a public messageboard. Amazing!

That's one of the things that really attracted me to the Paizo boards. Compared to other forums I've been to (unrelated to D&D), the people here seemed very friendly. People had intelligent discussions without resorting to personal attacks, unlike other forums. Of course, when someone came looking for a (verbal) fight, they always appeared to get what they wanted....

Cintra Bristol wrote:

Sebastian, you mentioned that it would be nice to have more people posting from amidst the pro-4E community here. I'll admit, that's where I'm guilty. I've been feeling afraid to post for a long time because I felt that my "optimism" would just draw arguments/attacks. But that's no way to make other people like me feel welcome here, either, is it?

So I hereby promise that I'll try to grow a backbone and start contributing a bit of enthusiasm, rather than waiting until I'm all depressed and irritable and posting a diatribe again...

As one of the above posters mentioned, please don't be afraid of speaking up, ever. Until Sebastion sounded off earlier, I thought he'd done a 180 about 4E! It never occured to me that he had gotten so fed up with some of us he passed up opportunities to deflate egos. All for lack of pro-4E posts?!

I guess what I want to say is anyone who wants to discuss, intelligently and maturely, any topic (even touchy ones) should do so. I'm not a Board Lord, and I can't claim to represent any person other than myself (and maybe my wife... maybe...), but discussion forums are enriched when both (all) sides are represented fairly.

So... Speak up!


crosswiredmind wrote:
How can imaginary fluff be "left in stone". If you don't like it then imagine new and different fluff for yourself.

The issue at hand seems to be - from the hints they've tossed out - that the "fluff" IS Crunch - they're all tied together, APPARENTLY.

crosswiredmind wrote:


Why should any of this be "left in stone"? Heck, prestige classes are so new that they can hardly be considered essential to the game.

Ah, Prestige Classes. As presented in the 3e DMG, probably the COOLEST single new thing they added to the game - ultra-rare specialty classes with strict requirements to join.

As actually used in 3.5 (common specialty classes that really seemed to add little to the game and just padded out products), possibly the WORST thing they did to the game...

At least IMO.

And, back kind of on topic - I see very little 4e "hatred" here - a lot of disappointment in the fact that it's coming out and mixed, mostly negative, reactions to every little - VERY VAGUE - hint WotC lets slip about what they have planned, but little real HATRED for the game. For Hasbro, yes - for WotC's marketing tactics, yes in spades - but not for the game itself. Rather difficult to hate something that doesn't really "exist" yet...

I dislike most of the changes they're making - or at LEAST the way they've PRESENTED said changes - myself. I don't HATE them, though - and may actually enjoy them once I see them in play. I won't hold my breath on this count, but won't deny the possibility. I would bet heavily against it ever being my preferred game system, though.

Note, however - gamers tend to be a passionate lot. They tend to pour vitriol on anything they dislike, and heap praise on anything they do, even if it doesn't truly merit either. You have to take anything said at a gaming message board with a grain of salt or you'll suffer an aneurysm...


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm not in favor of 4E, but I have no problem with someone liking it.

Different strokes and all that....

Just show the same respect and allow me to not like it. :)


Pathfinder Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Thanks to Aaron Whitley for posting where to get actual information on 4e. When I tried to figure out what all the fuss was about by looking a the WotC site, I gave up.

So anyway, some of the rule changes and new classes look like they might work out okay.

I never had a problem with AoO, it makes a certain amount of sense that you can't screw around with your backpack while someone's swinging at you. But I know lots of people found AoO frustrating, so I won't be sorry to see them go. I'm learning Tae Kwon Do, and I know from experience that you can move back more than 5' from someone without giving them a free poke, and without doing something so severe as a "withdrawl action". But maybe I have some ranks in Tumble I don't know about.

I play a lot of Wizard characters, and I've never really like the "Vancian" system of memorizing spell slots. I always liked power point systems, but I never got to play them much, so I just dealt with the D&D magic system. I also hated how easy it was for a spellcaster to run out of power at low levels. And tracking durations is a pain, so duration "encounter" might be nice. So I think I might like some of the changes to the magic system.

But the changes to the "Core Flavor" do grate a bit. Tieflings? Eladrins vs. woodsy elves? Whatever.

Points of Light? Oh, Please!! Make it Stop! Didn't Dana Carvey drive that joke into the ground on Saturday Night Live back in the 90's? I can see where there going with the idea, that most locations have no one to save them but plucky bands of adventurers. But it doesn't seem like a very sustainable concept. You'd probably need to have more adventurers than peasants to maintain the status quo.

Changes to the setting don't really worry me, because I'll be running in Golarion for the next few years.

I'm financially secure enough to buy the new core books, eventually. I bought a few 3.5 books and a few Eberron books, just to have something to spend my money on. But I totally understand folks who feel that a new set of core books is a burden. Especially considering the torrid pace at which WotC produced 3.5 books right up to and past the 4e annoncement.

But the Preview Books are such a crock! I can't imagine why anyone would want to buy those.


Shem wrote:


One thing that I really did not like about D&D until 3rd edition was the level caps for different Demi-humans. They could go far in their preferred class but if they dual classed or were in a class that was not their preferred class then they capped out early. Sometimes very early. 3rd edition really fixed this and opened up the system so much more.

No - demi-humans couldn't Dual Class (in fact, nobody could until 2e - the name "dual class" came first appeared in the 2e PHB, unless there was a prior appearance of it in Dragon) - humans could be a "Character with two classes" (unless they became a Bard, then - and ONLY then - they could have "three") and demi-humans could Multiclass...

I always house-ruled that the level limits ONLY applied to multi-classed characters; they pay for having that much versatility by having limited advancement. Single classed characters had no limit (but had to earn double XP beyond the racial cap).

3e "fixed" this by creating their own goofy multi-class mechanic which looks good on paper but never really felt right; this is one thing I really hope 4e does better.

And thanks ericthecleric - I was going by VERY vague memories myself... :D

Edit: Interesting - this was a REPLY to a post in the "Einstein and 4e" thread - not sure how it wound up HERE!!!

Edit x2: And I wonder if the reply I made to this thread is attached somewhere else or was just eaten by the board?


The idea of spells that last "an encounter" sounds good to me. I hate tracking spell durations, especially at high levels when I'm dming and have multiple spellcasters, who all have several spells active on them.

Qadira

P.H. Dungeon wrote:
The idea of spells that last "an encounter" sounds good to me. I hate tracking spell durations, especially at high levels when I'm dming and have multiple spellcasters, who all have several spells active on them.

They don't last "an encounter" in duration, they are once per encounter spells. The new designation for spells is (I may have the names wrong), at-will, once per encounter, and once per day usage. That is my understanding of how crap smells.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

I beleive it's both, Fakey.

some spells can be thrown each encounter (like ToB Maneuvers) and some spells (I assume like 3.x bulls strength) last an encoutner.


Grimcleaver wrote:
Sir Kaikillah wrote:

How are you doing that at this point without the rules?

More importantly how are you selling the idea of a new edition to your gaming group?

My group doesn't check Enworld, Paizo are WotC message boards or web sites. So all they know about 4e is from me. Yet still, as enthusiastic I am for 4e, my gaming group just doesn't want to hear about it.

Sorry. Didn't catch this until tonight. Really it's me talking over stuff that's being added to 4e that's stuff they like:


    - Little special abilities at every level

    - A more gradual 30 level growth curve rather than 20 with the claim that the high and low end will be better balanced against the middle "sweet spot"

    - More love to favorite classes like the Paladin with the new smites.

    - Powerscaling the feats so they aren't so uneven

    - Character abilities that work all the time, like the Warlock, so cool stuff doesn't "run out".

    - The "Points of Light" as used in the new core setting, to give a home to all the formerly irritating "generic" D&D elements without having to cram stuff into settings where it doesn't belong.

    - New flavor twists on creatures like the deathknight and zombie.

My group has always had their quibbles with 3rd edition, but were really hostile toward the idea of a 4th. They hated the changes to the storyline, hated the WoW imported ideas, and hated the thought that favorite game settings like Planescape were gonna' get axed. As I found out more I've been turning them around. Now they're just about as excited for 4e as I am--which is pretty tough, cause I'm really pretty jazzed.

Thanks I'll keep talking it up!

Osirion

The new edition news seems to have soured our gaming group on continuing playing 3.5, and yet, nobody seems interested in 4E.

The upside is that we've been playing more Mutants & Masterminds, but I doubt that's WotC's master plan.

Osirion

Set wrote:

The new edition news seems to have soured our gaming group on continuing playing 3.5, and yet, nobody seems interested in 4E.

The upside is that we've been playing more Mutants & Masterminds, but I doubt that's WotC's master plan.

Hmmmmmmm.....

<tinfoil hat>
Maybe it is! Maybe they are trying to make something that will tank so badly that they become something of a "poison pill" to Hasbro who, after the backlash of Barbie moms hits them with "why are you also selling this devil worshipping game?!", must sell them off to save their reputation. At that point, WotC could then come back into the marketplace and try to reclaim the M&M, GURPS, HERO, RM, etc players that it lost in its efforts to break free by producing the REAL 4e which makes sense and is somehow able to be converted to from 3.5e, paying attention to what its longtime customers actually want.
</tinfoil hat>

Where am I?...


After FINALLY getting to the end of this thread, I can finally speak!

First, Almost all of you have made very good arguments, and there are good points on both sides. That said, I feel a bit more inclined to shun 4th edition. I have purchased over the last 5 years or so, almost 70 3.X rulebooks and supplements -including almost the whole 3.0 line.

Yeah, 3.0 had issues. Bring in 3.5. Now, I have seen many of you aren't getting over needing to re-purchase updated versions of most of your books. All in all, I figure I got about 2200 dollars tied up all together. That's no chump change for me. We wont even get into the massive 2nd edition collection moldering out in the garage.

We were marketed to, sold on, and supported. We continued supporting our "friends" at WotC. and now we are being kicked to the curb. It really is difficult for me, at least, to not take it a bit personal.

Does anyone know if there has been any community polls about how well recieved 4E is? I'd love to see the actual numbers of people whom are TOTALLY against this ill move.

P.S. Stay 3.5 Paizo!


Donovan Vig wrote:


Does anyone know if there has been any community polls about how well recieved 4E is? I'd love to see the actual numbers of people whom are TOTALLY against this ill move.

Don't know of anything, and wouldn't know where to look. I just can't think of any big yet impartial community that is enough about D&D to make a poll that'd be even remotely representative.


Matthew Morris wrote:


We do have our share of bomb throwers (Razz, I'm looking at you) but they're being thrown on both sides of the line. Many of the aspects of 4.x do not apeal to me. I do wish WotC success in their plans, and I hope someone, beside me, contonues to design 3.x stuff.

My bomb throwing is legitimate. I honestly don't understand why one cannot see the "big picture" and the "ploys" of WotC...until after 4E is released? It boggles my mind, I mean, the faith some people have in WotC and 4E is truly mind boggling to me (and my friends and practically everyone at my local hobby shop, where we have termed WotC as Nazi since they rhyme when you say WotC phoenetically). These same people probably bash fundamental Christians or Muslims or Jehovah Witnesses or whomever, on their spare time but have blind faith in a company that's making the biggest mistake ever with D&D? Whether or not it's successful, it's still a mistake is what my point is. People thought our war with Iraq was what we need, but the country is realizing by the day what a huge mistake it was.

And there was a minority of us that believed the war was a mistake from the beginning, yet we were shunned by others because of that. Shunned as "unpatriotic". Like with me and 4E right now. Being shunned because the system isn't out yet, we don't know everything but what I am saying is we already know enough. I can't help but throw bombs at times if that's what it takes to get anyone to see even a glimpse of what 4E truly means for the Tabeltop RPG industry as a whole.


I don't really see why people are so offended by WotC right now. I understand that people here are upset about canning Dungeon and Dragon magazine that I can get. Though I love Pathfinder, and never had much use for Dragon anyhow, so I can't say that I'm really feeling the loss.

WotC is a publishing company. They make books and games. Why is it so shocking that they are going to publish new books? I've said it before, but there is really no shortage of 3.5 material to be had, so it's not like they haven't supported third edition.

I don't really see how they could keep publishing books for third edition for several more years. I feel like the game has run its course. Each year there are fewer and fewer 3E products I'm interested in buying.

I also think it's a good thing that they are looking critically at all aspects of the game, and are having the guts to make big changes. I don't think they are making changes for the sake of making changes. I think they are making changes because they believe those changes will make the new game better than the old one. At the same time they obviously are not keeping things for the sake of tradition. The people working on the game are all people who have played dnd for many many years through all its editions, and IMO have plenty of respect for the game. I don't think they are intentionally trying to put down previous editions or change the game into something entirely different. They are just saying that there is still room for improvement, and they have made a some lame attempts to be funny about some of the parts of the game they feel didn't work so smoothly. Personally, I didn't find the jokes very funny, but I in no way found them offensive like so many other people seem to have.

If people are content with the current or past incarnations of the game then great, keep playing 3E. But why get so hostile about a new edition? It's not like there isn't enough material from previous editions to keep campaigns going as long as you want them to, and it's not like they are going to come to your house and take your books.

As an aside, I would also be interested in hearing a little more about how the game is becoming more like WOW and other computer games. I have never played any online rpg, so I really don't know much about them (I basically don't play computer or video games). Lots of people are obviously concerned or offended by this prospect, but I don't really understand this whole segment of the concerns because of my MMOG ignorance. Can someone enlighten me (I know you have stats, levels, classes, races, magic etc and go into dungeons to kill monsters..)?

Osirion

Not that I disagree with you, Razz, but sometimes it's all in how you say it. The message is often lost because of the way in which it is delivered.

Do I consider it blind faith that people think 4e will be good? No, not really. I think WotC are (or were, anyway) talented folks who designed an excellent game in 3.x. I do think that removes the "blind" adjective. There is a reason to have faith in WotC that the next edition may be good. Everyone is at a different level, though.... while I enjoy the "traditions" of D&D and don't want to see them changed (a la 4e), I can understand that there are a lot of gamers who care nothing for that and are just looking for a game with which they can have fun. More power to them. Do I think they're idiots? Nope. DO I think they might be deluded in their faith in WotC? Perhaps, but that's totally on me, and not on them. DOes it hurt me in any way for them to be enthusiastic about 4e? No, not really, other than the way that 4e is being marketed (or rather, 3.x is being anti-marketed to make 4e seem more appealing).

I dunno... I think I've mellowed a lot in the last couple of days. If people want to play 4e, then go for it. The *only* way to know if 4e will suck or soar is to wait until it's out. (Of course, I might point out, that it will take *years* for it to get back to the level of "completeness" that 3.x enjoys right now given the release schedule of the PHBII, PHBIII, PHBIV, etc.)

Anyway, not that your points aren't worthwhile, but a little less frothing might make people listen more closely and respond less radically. Or not. Who knows? :)


P.H. Dungeon wrote:
WotC is a publishing company. They make books and games. Why is it so shocking that they are going to publish new books?

Nothing in of itself. It's not my problem with the situation. Others may have it (I'm sure it is), but not mine. Not per se.

The problems with new books start when they go out of their way to make the old ones useless, so you have to buy all the new ones.

I know, I know, new rules mean that the old rules parts will be mostly obsolete, that doesn't mean that they'd like nothing more than come to our houses and burn our old books.

Except that they're not just changing the rules (and, it sounds, go out of their way to make the rules parts particularly incompatible, so you can get as little of rules out of the old books) but also change the flavour so not only the old rules ore useless to 4e games, but also the old background information.

I know again, I know again, I can just use the old fluff with the new crunch.

Except they're making that hard, too. They staple the new flavour to the new rules. If you want to use the great wheel, a lot of things in the 4e PHB will probably need work to work with it.

I don't say it's all impossible, but it seems that they put a serious effort into making it harder. Forcing you to put up an effort to keep using the old books, probably too much for a lot of people to keep their old books (we all know how little time we have to tinker with stuff. Life's a b~&*# that way. That's why campaign settings and adventure paths and fluff-rich supplements are such a good idea) thus buying the new books.

It all looks too well-done to be a coincidence, a mere side-effect of their grand plan to make D&D an enjoyable game again.

All that, plus I still think 3e had a couple of years in it yet.

P.H. Dungeon wrote:
I've said it before, but there is really no shortage of 3.5 material to be had, so it's not like they haven't supported third edition.

They did support it. Past tense. But then they dropped it and are now talking nasty stories about its mother.

P.H. Dungeon wrote:


I don't really see how they could keep publishing books for third edition for several more years.

I can: Get some ideas. Explore new venues. Listen to the fans and try to figure out what they want, and give it to them.

P.H. Dungeon wrote:


I also think it's a good thing that they are looking critically at all aspects of the game, and are having the guts to make big changes. I don't think they are making changes for the sake of making changes. I think they are making changes because they believe those changes will make the new game better than the old one.

They assure us that this is so, but I can't let myself believe that. It fits too well together to be something that isn't meant to force people to buy.

I also think that many of those big things I heard about weren't necessary ones.

What's wrong with the great wheel, for example? Was that too hard to get for your average D&D player? (I know, I know, that's a bad question - apparently, single first-grade math skills are beyond the average D&D player) Did people hear of it and think "D&D has some sort of wheel as their world plan. That's boring. I'd rather play WoW"? What part of it is broken and thus needs fixing grave enough to render old material (like, say, all Manuals of the Planes and similar books) obsolete? The Wheel has been around for, what, 30 years? If it's that broken, how come no one found out before? How come no one came up with a better idea before.

P.H. Dungeon wrote:


At the same time they obviously are not keeping things for the sake of tradition.

Which, if you ask me (and even if you don't), is a bad thing to do to a game that draws heavily on tradition. Especially since a lot of those things weren't broken to begin with. There's more to these things than just tradition.

To repeat something that has been said: Sacred Cows are Sacred for a reason. Or, to put it another way: If the oldest trick in the book didn't work, it wouldn't be in the book.

P.H. Dungeon wrote:


The people working on the game are all people who have played dnd for many many years through all its editions, and IMO have plenty of respect for the game.

Have you read how they talk about the game? Not the edition they're working on right now, but the one they have published for a couple of years, just until a couple of weeks ago.

P.H. Dungeon wrote:
It's not like there isn't enough material from previous editions to keep campaigns going as long as you want them to, and it's not like they are going to come to your house and take your books.

That's a different problem beyond the hate, let me elaborate about how a new edition you don't like isn't a good thing, even if you don't hate the new edition and the guys who're making said new edition:

With a new edition, the support for the old edition will wane. Some of us "grognards" like getting new books. And if those books use rules and flavour you don't want, you're out at sea.

Let me give you one example: Pathfinder. Imagine that you don't play 4e, for whatever reason, and that you like Pathfinder (chances for the latter are quite good, given the location). Now imagine Pathfinder changing to 4e. Now Pathfinder has become a lot less useful to you (personally, I think that if I'd have to come up with the rules stuff myself, Pathfinder would become a lot less useful to me). Sounds good to you? Yeah, to me neither.

I also liked the Forgotten Realms. I read the novels, bought all the FR books. But I can't stomach the new ones, I won't read the novels, and won't buy the 4e FR books.
One of the things I liked about the Realms is that it lived. Things were happening beyond what was happening in our groups. I can't have that if I avoid the current books like the plague. That combined with Golarion shaping up so well, I turned out the lights on Toril before they had the chance to change into points.

P.H. Dungeon wrote:


As an aside, I would also be interested in hearing a little more about how the game is becoming more like WOW and other computer games. I have never played any online rpg, so I really don't know much about them (I basically don't play computer or video games).

I haven't, either, thank any number of belief systems and their symbolic figures, but some things I see:

They spell out roles, like defender or crowd control.

They have "elite" enemies instead of gradual improvements (which might make things easier - though I don't see how, after all, they could just put two stat blocks of each critter in the books, like they did with many 3.5e monsters, and still allow other forms of improvement which are not as restricting)

They promote a blast-all-day mentality, a more reckless fire-and-forget style of play. Don't think, just click buttons, the raid is on, the clock is ticking. No time to think, no need to think. (I'm all for getting rid of gamestoppers, but I don't consider my brain a gamestopper. If I wanted brainless mashing of buttons, I wouldn't need D&D at all. I do have computer games for those. And they're even better at it, because they enforce the rules all by themselves. I want D&D to have some more depth than that).

There's probably more.

Qadira

KaeYoss wrote:
With a new edition, the support for the old edition will wane. Some of us "grognards" like getting new books.

Yes, but it is clear that not many people are buying the new books. You can't run a large company with dwindling revenue.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
crosswiredmind wrote:
Yes, but it is clear that not many people are buying the new books.

What evidence do you have for this?

Qadira

DaveMage wrote:
crosswiredmind wrote:
Yes, but it is clear that not many people are buying the new books.
What evidence do you have for this?

Uh, Lisa Stevens said so.

On top of that you can ask any local game shop owner. Rules sell like gang busters. Setting book do ok. Source books? Not so good. Adventures, poor.

The longer an edition runs the lower the sales.

Small companies can find their niche and run with it.

WotC can't get by on the sales of Tome of Battle Nine Sword Thingy.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
crosswiredmind wrote:
DaveMage wrote:
crosswiredmind wrote:
Yes, but it is clear that not many people are buying the new books.
What evidence do you have for this?

Uh, Lisa Stevens said so.

Link?

Or do you mean sales are down since the 4E announcement?

Qadira

DaveMage wrote:
crosswiredmind wrote:
DaveMage wrote:
crosswiredmind wrote:
Yes, but it is clear that not many people are buying the new books.
What evidence do you have for this?

Uh, Lisa Stevens said so.

Link?

Or do you mean sales are down since the 4E announcement?

I really don't feel like digging it up. There was a section on some thread here where she talked about the dwindling sales of RPGs over the last few years.


Since crosswiredmind didn't provide a link, here's a link to the chat transcript with Lisa Stevens at the beginning of November.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Thanks, Lilith!

That interview talks about the entire RPG market shrinking, nothing to do with declining sales of 3E products, crosswiredmind.


Lisa Stevens wrote:

I actually know that the RPG market is shrinking. We are getting older and older and there isn't a lot of new kids coming in. I think they are tantalized by online and video games, and thus it is harder for us to get them to play RPGs...Ten years ago, you were disappointed selling 20,000 copies of an RPG product. Today, 5,000 is a success story.

WOTC may be selling fewer books, I don't know. This quote indicates a 10 year trend over the entire industry, and doesn't directly speak to whether WOTC sold less in 2007 than in 2006 or 2005 specifically. They may have, but I'm just saying that its not in evidence due to this quote.

President, Jon Brazer Enterprises

Morris (ENPublishing) said that his sales dropped 80% after 4E's announcement. He's said that if he produces more 3.5 products now, he'll lose money on it.

He's also talked to (can't remember the name) over at DriveThruRPG/RPGNow/OneBookShelf and he said that d20 sales are down across the board since 4E's announcement.

(Sorry, but no I don't have a link handy, but Morris hasn't exactly been quiet about his sales being down.)


Addressing the OP, you are not alone. While I've always looked forward to 4e, I've been hesitant because I too was upset about the magazines and some of the changes they were planning didn't make sense to me. However, having looked up Races & Classes I'm more excited than ever. It feels like the game I've always wanted to play, but I was afraid to ask for.

Which is why it was a little disconcerting to me the Paizo boards (not Paizo itself, of course) seemed a little hostile to the issue. I love this company, love their products, but the anti-4e talk was difficult to listen to. But I think Sebastian has the right idea to just let it pass.

I'm not an online player. I've played this game for twenty years. I don't necessarily fit the "young, MMORPG player" that 4e is supposedly focused on. I just like stories, fantasy, and creative energy. And for me, what I've read so far has a good offering of it all.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
DMcCoy1693 wrote:

Morris (ENPublishing) said that his sales dropped 80% after 4E's announcement. He's said that if he produces more 3.5 products now, he'll lose money on it.

He's also talked to (can't remember the name) over at DriveThruRPG/RPGNow/OneBookShelf and he said that d20 sales are down across the board since 4E's announcement.

(Sorry, but no I don't have a link handy, but Morris hasn't exactly been quiet about his sales being down.)

Right. I don't doubt that sales slumped for some after the 4E announcement. My question regards sales prior to the 4E announcement of WotC 3.5 products. Were THOSE sales down? For example, how well did the MM5 sell before the announcement (compared with, say, the MM4)?

That's the info I would like to know.

Of course, the only thing that matters locally here and now at Paizo is the effect on their sales, such as with the GameMastery product line. If that line is way down, then, yes, Houston, we have a problem. If not, though, and sales are flat (or doing well) then I'm sure the staff meetings regarding the future (3.5 vs. 4E) are very interesting these days. :)

Qadira

The trend over the last 10 years is part of what I was referring to. The other part is the proportion of sales when you compare rule books, setting books, source books, and adventures.

All you need to do is ask you local game store and they will tell you that rule books sell great during the first year they are out and then they slow down. Setting books sell too but not as well as rules. Source books sometimes to better than setting books but they to fall short of the rule books. The further along an edition goes the fewer of those sell. adventures are always slow to sell.

Role playing games need fresh rules every few years to keep sales up. This is especially true of a large company like Wizards.

If you want me to provide hard numbers - I can't. But if you ask the people who sell games they will tell you the same story.


Sebastian wrote:


Anyway, there is a pro-4e community here and they rarely get attacked directly unless they swing first. It'd be nice to have more members in that community, so I hope you will stick around and increase the frequency with which you post. What Paizo needs more of is 4e advocates who are willing to post their thoughts without trying to convert those who don't want to be converted.

I'm all for seeing what they're going to do with 4E, excited even, but I don't like to post on the matter because we really don't know exactly what they're doing. All our speculating is based on skeletal information with a few pieces of skin and fur. Until I'm holding the book in my hand I've really got nothing to say.

In a sense, my attitude spares me most of the anxiety, cuz I don't got to Wizard's site anymore and don't read any of the crap that seems to be pissing off some of my peers in here. And I think I'll keep it that way.

Also, as crosswiredmind has been arguing, and others, I really can sympathize with their need to turnover every 5 years or so with a new system to keep making their money. It's a business.


KaeYoss wrote:


The problems with new books start when they go out of their way to make the old ones useless, so you have to buy all the new ones.

Old rules aren't useless if you and some buddies decide to use them. IT's a state of mind. My 2c.

Andoran

One of my favorite phrases is 'correlation, not causation'. It has been since about 7th grade. It is amazing how frequently the two are conflated.

For example, sales are down for 3.5 products. 3.5 has been out for close to five years.

Is the first statement a result of the second? It could be. But it could also be because 'There has been a general decline in quality in 3.5 products.' Or it could be 'Recent WotC releases fail to build on other books released, so, for example, there are no expansions for shadow magic or new lists of invocations for warlocks'.

For me, I was happy to buy WotC products as long as they were quality products, and that has been the problem for quite some time. I never was interested in Forgotten Realms books, but I have a friend who is. Looking at that book after he bought it did more to hurt my purchases for WotC than anything else for quite some time. I flipped through random pages on every page I found one or more glaring typos. One or two minor typos in a book (like too instead of to, or effect instead of affect) wouldn't bother me - but one per page?! That fell far short of my personal standard, and since I'm paying money for someone else's hard work, I expect it to be better than I can do on my own.

Now, I did continue to buy their products. Happily for them, I bought Complete Mage, which I thought was an excellent book. It invigorated me so much that I bought Lords of Madness, Libris Mortis, Fiendish Codex 1&2 and a couple of other books. Then they announced the cancellation of the magazines and I knew that I was done with them.

I like to buy gaming products because I enjoy them, and I like supporting a company that produces products that I like. Even when things aren't directly useful, I want to help them stay in business because they make other products that I will use. I figure if they sell enough to keep in business, that's good for me overall. I still require that the products be high quality - something I think should be produced - but it doesn't have to be immediately useful for me.

With the release of 4th edition, I don't see them addressing any of their problems. They don't consider 'minor errors in stat blocks' to be something that is worthy of errata. They haven't told us what they're doing to address the number of typos and ensure that the product quality is maintained. They haven't indicated that they'll make any changes to keep a book that is released 'tied in' with future releases. 3.5 isn't being crushed under its own weight - it is just so spread out that it is hard to use it all at once. A few books that tie some of the concepts together more strongly could do really well.

In any case, the fact that I don't need a new edition makes converting to 4th edition harder. The fact that I don't like the company producing 4th edition makes it impossible. The fact that I don't trust them not to make 'electronic content' required as part of play is another strike against them. I think having physical representations of our existence is important. And that means magazines when they're appropriate. As happy as I am with Paizo products since they found all the free time they used to devote to the magazines, I will not forget that it was WotC that chose not to renew the license, and they took away a product that I enjoyed and got a lot of use out of. Even if I believed them at the time that they would continue the same quality of articles online - the fact is they have failed miserably. Just more indications that the company cna't maintain the quality I expect and require before parting with my money.


Kruelaid wrote:
KaeYoss wrote:


The problems with new books start when they go out of their way to make the old ones useless, so you have to buy all the new ones.
Old rules aren't useless if you and some buddies decide to use them. IT's a state of mind. My 2c.

Have you actually read anything I wrote?

It's not about being a state of mind, but about how Wizards makes it harder to draw use from those books.

It's not that I want to throw those books away. I want to keep using them. But should I use 4e, I'll have my work cut out for me in order to use them.

Qadira

DeadDMWalking wrote:

One of my favorite phrases is 'correlation, not causation'. It has been since about 7th grade. It is amazing how frequently the two are conflated.

For example, sales are down for 3.5 products. 3.5 has been out for close to five years.

Is the first statement a result of the second? It could be. But it could also be because 'There has been a general decline in quality in 3.5 products.' Or it could be 'Recent WotC releases fail to build on other books released, so, for example, there are no expansions for shadow magic or new lists of invocations for warlocks'.

Yeah, but this happens to all RPGs. You can only sustain high sales when the audience is paying attention. Tome of Battle does not get attention. 4E will.

Osirion

KaeYoss wrote:

It's not about being a state of mind, but about how Wizards makes it harder to draw use from those books.

It's not that I want to throw those books away. I want to keep using them. But should I use 4e, I'll have my work cut out for me in order to use them.

I'm not a fan of 4e, and won't be playing it. However, I have to say that your argument sounds kind of like "why the hell can't I use this 2000 Chevrolet Impala manual, which I've quite enjoyed while driving my Impala, for the new 2008 Chevrolet Malibu??"

They are different animals.... they've changed the rules and the fluff, and of course you can't use the old with the new. This was surely one of their major priorities with developing the new system - there is no way that it could have been so different unless that was a highlighted note in the design strategy.


crosswiredmind wrote:

The trend over the last 10 years is part of what I was referring to. The other part is the proportion of sales when you compare rule books, setting books, source books, and adventures.

All you need to do is ask you local game store and they will tell you that rule books sell great during the first year they are out and then they slow down. Setting books sell too but not as well as rules. Source books sometimes to better than setting books but they to fall short of the rule books. The further along an edition goes the fewer of those sell. adventures are always slow to sell.

Role playing games need fresh rules every few years to keep sales up. This is especially true of a large company like Wizards.

If you want me to provide hard numbers - I can't. But if you ask the people who sell games they will tell you the same story.

I'm telling the same story. I support Paizo with my own money and steer likeminded hobbyists towards their products, but no amount of handselling will compete with the customer-driven sales of new rulebooks.

4E was always an inevitability. It's WOTC's "Trust us, kids. We know what we're doing and it's going to roxxorz your soxxorz!" that pisses me off. They could be building so much hype, but they're only alienating their existing customer base. I see ABSOLUTELY NO buzz outside of the hobby for 4E. Where are these new gamers supposed to come from? Myspace?

If that's the case, then I should see new faces showing up to try D&D for the first time when 4E comes out. Sadly, I lack that level of optimism. I suppose that makes me a grognard who isn't on board for the new online agenda (tm). C'est la vie.


hmarcbower wrote:
KaeYoss wrote:

It's not about being a state of mind, but about how Wizards makes it harder to draw use from those books.

It's not that I want to throw those books away. I want to keep using them. But should I use 4e, I'll have my work cut out for me in order to use them.

I'm not a fan of 4e, and won't be playing it. However, I have to say that your argument sounds kind of like "why the hell can't I use this 2000 Chevrolet Impala manual, which I've quite enjoyed while driving my Impala, for the new 2008 Chevrolet Malibu??"

They are different animals.... they've changed the rules and the fluff, and of course you can't use the old with the new. This was surely one of their major priorities with developing the new system - there is no way that it could have been so different unless that was a highlighted note in the design strategy.

Except that this is the first time this happens.

In 3e, I can use stuff from 2e, in 2e, I can use stuff from 1e, and so on. Maybe not the mechanics, but the flavour, because it's still mostly the same. Because it's supposed to be the same game, just in a different edition.

But for the first time ever, they're taking pains with making it a different game (so you can't use the old stuff) but keep the name (to cash in on the name).

Osirion

hmarcbower wrote:
They are different animals.... they've changed the rules and the fluff, and of course you can't use the old with the new. This was surely one of their major priorities with developing the new system - there is no way that it could have been so different unless that was a highlighted note in the design strategy.
KaeYoss wrote:

Except that this is the first time this happens.

In 3e, I can use stuff from 2e, in 2e, I can use stuff from 1e, and so on. Maybe not the mechanics, but the flavour, because it's still mostly the same. Because it's supposed to be the same game, just in a different edition.

But for the first time ever, they're taking pains with making it a different game (so you can't use the old stuff) but keep the name (to cash in on the name).

Oh, I agree that it sucks... but I was just pointing out that it's fairly clear they did it intentionally - something they intentionally *avoided* in earlier edition changes. There was a good podcast interview with Ryan Dancey that I listened to in which he said, and I paraphrase, "that's why Magic Missile still has no save - even though it should - and why Paladins are only Lawful Good. We asked the people who play 2e and they said those kinds of things are needed." And for 3e they started with a clean slate, except for those things which maintained strong ties with the earlier edition.

Obviously, with 4e, they have not only gone to a clean slate but rewritten their internal dictionary, reusing names and changing the definitions. They have made a concerted effort to break with the old game - and thus the old customers.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Tales Subscriber
CEBrown wrote:
...On other sites, there's still lingering outrage from the shifts to all previous editions...

I sincerely wonder: if WotC had renewed the contracts with Paizo, and Paizo (naturally) supported 4E, how would these boards read...? I'm willing to bet the general tone would be quite different.

101 to 150 of 165 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Gaming / D&D 4th Edition (and Beyond) / Am I all alone? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.