For much of the very late 70's and early 80's my wife, a group of my friends and I made the yearly trip to the U of I campus for Winter War. At the time it was always held in the Foreign Languages Building. Individual games in each classroom. I suspect that having it at the hotel these days makes things like eating and sleeping much more convenient for everyone. No more slogging through hip-deep snow drifts to get a slice of pizza downtown! (I wonder if Papa Del's pizza is even still around and is it as good these days as I remember it being?)
We had a streak of 3 or 4 years where we won the (insert name of the oldest tabletop RPG here) competition. The yearly game auction was always a lot of fun (and if you paid attention, you could track certain copies of a few wargames that inevitably changed hands there year after year). I also recall a very nice gentleman who brought a painted scale army of an actual German Panzer division - each and every vehicle - each year.
One year there were pamphlets, right at the registration desk, that warned everyone of the demonic and satanic influence of D&D. I suspect that they were snuck in without the con knowing about them. One of the instructors in the psych college at the time was involved in the anti - D&D movement (Dr. Thomas Radecki, if you want to google it).
Now the wife and I are older, and don't play as much as we used to. Might be fun to pop down to Champaign, Il. this winter and see how much things have changed!
Thanks for stirring up many fond memories, Bob!
I'm right next door to you, Moriartty. Algonquin. I might be able to attend a weekend thing if they were on Sundays, as I usually end up working every Saturday but one a month.
I was ready for this to suck.
I didn't like 3rd edition, too many rules and revisions to rules, and revisions to the revisions ... It was the first set of rules about my favorite game that I just could not seem to grasp. So, for a while, I stopped playing.
Now, I like Paizo, there is a great deal of talent there and their adventures set the standard in the industry today. So, I thought I would give the new rules a chance. $50 wouldn't kill me and it would look fine sitting unused next to my unused 3.x books.
I GET IT!!
Don't ask me why; it might be the writing which is clear and concise, it might be the manner in which it is presented, or it might be that I are jist smarter than I uzed to be. ;)
Whatever, I don't care!
I GET IT!!!
Thanks, Paizo. You've somehow unlocked the door that will allow me to again pick up this hobby. You've got yourself a customer!
Because at level 15 +1 experience point, your character's head explodes.
No really, it's in the rules.
Matthew Koelbl wrote:
Matthew, there will always be people who like to poke at others in order to get a reaction. The "anonymity" of the internet facilitates it. These kinds of people are never going to go away.
The choice then becomes what *YOU* will do. If you comment and complain and wring your hands and show that they bother you, then they are further encouraged to continue the behavior to the detriment of us all. If, and *only* if you *allow* the thread to become derailed, it will.
In the end, you and Scott and all of us have the choice as to whether the thread succeeds or fails - despite being baited, it would behoove us all if, when our noses are tweaked here, we simply ignore it and go on as if nothing had happened. Eventually, the fun goes out of it and the tweaking slows way down.
The thing to remember is that none of this is about us, and no one here should have their ego tied up into a silly hobby discussion board to the extent that they feel that must post dozens of replies to various people in the thread, all saying pretty much the same thing.
A trick I've found, when I've needed to use it, is to adjust my posting style so that I never address a particular poster directly, rather, I only address the issue being discussed. That takes away a lot of the possibility of personal affront and defuses any kind of animosity that might occur.
That, of course, is what is meant by the "high road".
And with that, I'll stop derailing this thread myself. ;)
Scott Betts wrote:
Scott, when the tread starts to become less about the topic and more about the way in which *you* respond to the topic, that is a clue that some introspection on your part is in order.
Are you really helping the discussion move along, or are you more interested in semi-snide generalizations and scoring "points" who disagree with you?
Frankly, I try to avoid topics where you are one of the main people involved in the discussion, because invariably at some point part of the discussion becomes about you, and while I mean no offense, I am not interested in you.
The only advice I can give is to try to ratchet down the snideness, the generalization about those who disagree with you, and don't think that you must be the defender of all that is 4e - which is your reputation currently.
Take the high road, despite what others do, and I suspect that you'll find more people responding in a manner which will benefit us all here.
pres man wrote:
I would find it strange if a company like Green Ronin made a seriously dedicated product line with compatibility to the final PFRPG. If you are unwilling to put your eggs in WotC's basket, why put them in Paizo's? Especially when you have your own system(s) and product lines?
Possibly due to the fact that Paizo's vision is closer to Green Ronin's?
Perhaps because it won't take Paizo over a year from launch to come out with (what is hoped, this time) is the *final* design license?
Perhaps because Paizo has exhibited none of the apparent schizophrenia of WotC (see GR's comment concerning factions at WotC above).
Perhaps, just perhaps, WotC has *earned* the mistrust of the 3rd-party publishers, through the missteps that have already occurred.
Perhaps Paizo looks more promising because Paizo doesn't require you to put the whole dozen eggs in their basket?
No one can say for sure, but it is sure fun to speculate. :)
Based on the decision you have made regarding which version of D&D is best, it is my duty to inform you that your avatar is silly and your feet smell. Also...
Guess I am just out of practice.
Matthew Koelbl wrote:
Because Scott has taken a position which inferred that the person he replied to did not consider the whole of the issue with her post. He then posted a counter-position and listed his reasons. That *is* an argument.
The definition of the term "argument" does not have to include one side or the other using bitterness, anger or personal attacks (although that is the norm on the internet). I thought that they both did quite well in presenting their opinions.
My comment should be taken at face value - I read each post, and considered the argument on each side and found (and still find) that the first argument was the better of the two.
Matthew Koelbl wrote:
What I don't get is not just the need to defend which format one individually prefers, but the need to mock anyone who prefers the other format.
I don't see anyone here mocking another poster's position (unless perhaps you stretch one of Scott's comments). I *do* see two adults rather calmly staking out positions which have opposite conclusions (and will have, of course, for each person reading). I've seen too many internet "flame wars" to consider this particular discussion to be anything but what it was; an argument between two sides, each presenting their reasons for the position they hold.
I mean, that *is* kind of the reason for places like this, right? Again, I thought both did quite well.
Matthew Koelbl wrote:
So you have taken a counter-position in the argument. Welcome to the argument! :)
None of this, folks, is life threatening, and there are simply too many *real* problems in the world right now to get too worked up over a game. I hope everyone keeps in mind that no matter what position they take on an issue here, the sun will still rise, the dog will still have to be walked, and you'll still have to pay your taxes.
Be good to one another.
I'd have to say that to my mind at least, Eileen has the better of the argument.
Tharen the Damned wrote:
Yup, I think you're right.
And $2 for a PDF is not out of line with the industry norm, so I retract my snarky in my previous post.
I still wish GG the best of luck, I suspect that they have found a niche that might well be good for them and the game. At least, we who like dead-wood things can hope. :)
From the GG site:
"Level Up will be available in bricks-and-mortar retail stores for the low, low price of only $1.99. It will also be available via subscription and PDF for the still-reasonable price of $4.00."
Well, that's better. It's reassuring to see that GG is following the leaders and innovators in the industry by charging more for the online version than the paper one.
A $2 surcharge to access the same content of the print magazine in PDF format is entirely reasonable. Obviously, as has been shown by the successful companies in this industry, charging more for a package of content (whether or not the customer actually desires everything in that package) that the customer has limited access to (requires a PC/reader and an internet connection as opposed to a back pocket and a folded magazine) simply makes the actual content provided that much *better*.
$2 better a month, in fact.
(Note to all reading from the rational right-half of Bear's brain: I truly do wish GG the best of luck with this. I applaud them for their printed pricing decision and their stated commitment to the local game stores. While I play little 4E, I certainly will pick up the first issue or two of this publication to see if there is anything inside that is of value to me. Who knows, if the content is useful and well-written, it might even cause some folks to re-evaluate their impressions of 4E. I truly don't see a downside to any of this, aside from the fact that if it is successful it makes some decisions by that huge mega-company(tm) look a little bit more foolish. Now, how do we get KQ out bi-monthly and available at game shops for the other half of the D&D player base?)
Nah, it'll never be successful.
I mean, c'mon, everyone knows that the printed page is a dying medium, and that providing a virtual product is much more in tune with the mindset of a new generation of gamers; at least much more than something that they can actually purchase, touch and collect. GG does not even mention if a subscriber has the choice of incurring the extra added expense of using ones own ink, paper and printer to make another hard copy of product, which as we all now know, is the successful wave of the future.
Heck, I bet that GG will even be able to provide relevant and timely 4E content on a monthly schedule! A monthly schedule??! What a joke! Everyone now knows that customers would much rather have to log onto the internet each day to see if such content has been squeezed out in dribs and drabs over a thirty (or so) day schedule.
And look at the planned content! Adventures! Character options! New monsters! An advice column??! How 1990's is that? Companies much smarter than GG have shown that people don't want such relevant content! They would much rather hear about how wonderful it will be that they are going to have to buy yet another $35 hardcover to find out what will be the "official" rules for character classes that were left out of the first two $35 hardcover books that they were thrilled to spend their money on. And as an added bonus, they get to read that despite the delays on promised content, the company has no new news to provide in weekly update, so the company has discontinued the weekly update.
It is obvious that THAT is the new online paradigm of customer service; that THAT is what the new generation of D&D players are all about, and that THAT is where the smart money is being made these days.
And the price!!??!! Are you KIDDING me? Two dollars each month?! Two dollars for something that I can actually buy and take home from my local game store which could provide well-written and interesting content for my 4E game? That is just plain silly! It has been shown over the last year or so that no one wants to buy an actual "print" magazine about Dungeons and Dragons. They would much rather download, read and/or incur the expense of printing out a series of combat encounters under the heading of an "adventure". Indeed, string enough of them together and you have an "adventure path"! Let's see GG do THAT with a silly $2 monthly print magazine.
Now that it has been revealed that Kobold Quarterly's sales sales are tied directly into Wolfgang's family buying multiple copies each month, the evidence that the print magazine - at any price - is dead is simply overwhelming.
I've always liked GG, but I fail to see how they arrived at the decision to publish this product. My fear is that by having to produce a high-quality, content-rich, inexpensive paper periodical each month they will soon fall victim to the same insidious disease that caused the much-deserved death of the previous incarnation of Dragon and Dungeon. Slowly, as sales increase, they could well be rotting their business from the inside.
Heck, I bet they even plan to *actually produce and ship* this thing each month as they have promised. That in and of itself is bad for this hobby, for if we as customers held successful game companies to their promises of content, some of which we have already paid for, where would it end?!!?
Anarchy, unrest and a vague feeling of ennui, that's where!
GG, I wish you well, but I cannot help feeling that if you were REALLY serious about providing 4E content, you would not be pursuing a tottering, decrepit, and failed medium such as the printed page, and instead would learn from the runaway success of other giants in the industry in promising access to rich online content, and sometimes even *delivering* on that promise.
Good luck to GG. They will need it.
*Snarky Alert has ended*
Evil Genius wrote:
I am a DDI subscriber. To process the subscription order, you must check a box that means you realize that it will auto-renew once your current subscription is up.
Yes, I think that is what he was saying. From the way I read it, I think the problem he was addressing was that you cannot opt out of auto-renewal and still subscribe. Is that the case?
If so, I can see why people are upset, but it seems like they are on it. Just bad timing (over the holiday) all around.
I don't think you do have to agree to it automatically re-subscribing. I better check!
This, from that thread, from a user named "artifact".
"Do your homework ahead of time. Know what you're getting into, before ever putting down money. You must agree to auto-renewal at sign-up; there is NO option to avoid it, and having it canceled can be a hassle (obviously)."
Anyone confirm this?
The web site "The Consumerist" (which if I recall correctly is owned by the people from consumer reports) has posted a story on how difficult (and in some cases, impossible) it has been for a user of DDi to stop the automatic renewal (which all users must agree to, if my info is right), and cancel the service.
(you will have to delete the space before the word "over" if you are cutting and pasting)
Funny? Not really. There are people taking shots at Hasbro there, which I guess is a natural reaction. But to me the really sad thing is to have to watch the company who owns the rights to this hobby I have had for 32 years stumble.
The incompetence (if that is what it is, and it seems to be so) at Hasbro does nothing but give people another reason to walk away.
Here's hoping that things get sorted out ASAP.
I've never really understood the "its just not D&D" feeling that seems so prevalant. What is D&D? Can someone quantify it? Is it quantifiable?
Closest I've ever been able to come (and someone touched on it here already) is the simulationist feel vs. the cinematic feel.
It's certainly not a complete answer, but it is the best I've heard so far.
Dennis da Ogre wrote:
The bigger difference is Paizo has people's trust.
I think Dennis hit something important, right on the head (who woulda thunk it, from an ogre?)
With Paizo, there is a history of value for the money. I don't think that even the most ardent WOC fan could argue honestly that the product put out over the last year or so is not in some measure overpriced, over-promised and/or under-delivered.
Now, a year from now, that may change and DDi might well be a heck of a bargain and almost mandatory for 4e players. Simply, based on the manner that WOC has chosen to split the D&D community, they are going to have to take quite a while to play catch-up, as I see it.
Best of luck to them. For purely personal reasons I will not support them. I am sticking with Pathfinder and looking forward to reading Hackmaster 5.0
The Last Rogue wrote:
It must be a regional thing.
My local shop has gone from displaying a 6-ft section of 4ed material on release, to a 4-foot section after 2 months. Now, it is (all of it) sitting on a 2 foot endcap.
The owner has called it a "disaster" due to the feeling of customer ill-will towards WOTC in deciding to split their customer base.
I don't come here as often as I used to, due to the decrease of signal to noise around here. There are other boards I have quit altogether.
In general, we as a society have lost the desire to partake in the art of the argument. Thanks to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, the 24-hr news cycle, and the incorrect idea that everyone is anonymous on the internet, we've come to the point where it matters less what you say than how loudly you can say it. Extra points, of course, for attacking the other side personally (or flip it; complaining incorrectly that you were attacked personally to drive attention away from the issues) (See: the current presidential campaign).
This forum is simply a reflection of society at large.
And it is not going to get better folks.
The only answer - and I am directing this to the several posters here on both sides who seem to have nothing better to do than to try to degrade discussions into free-for-alls - is maturity and self-control.
Think about this: You might win the argument, but you look like a fool doing it.
With that, I'm gone for a while again.
Good luck to you all.
We've been here before, and quite recently at that.
It took the temp-banning of a past regular poster (whom as far as I can tell has not returned) and the near-banning of another (who probably deserved it as much) to get things back to a normal level of conversation.
Some here, sadly, do not seem to take past lessons to heart.
A shame, really.
Good luck to you all.
Yeah, and Gary was very very wrong. He once wrote, in the Dragon, (and Kim Mohan tried in his editorial to back him up as best he could) that you *had* to play AD%D with the rules published, and *ONLY* with the rules published, or else you were playing "something else". That was the infamous "Monopoly" article that caused so much fuss back before the internet. :)
So, Gary was wrong.
So too, are people who say that 4e is not D&D.
But just like Gary all those years ago, what they *should* be saying is that this new version is not **MY** D&D.
Roleplaying as we know it today was foreign to Gygax and he reacted (although he certainly did tone things down subsequently).
The move from an attempt to simulate some sort of reality within the context of the rules (which was one of the main thrusts since those three little white/buff books) towards now having rules unsupported by "reality" simply because it makes the game "sleeker" or "faster" or "easier" (or whatever platitude/denigration you want to put on it) is foreign to many of us who have played the game since before many of the current players were born.
Gary eventually, I suspect, saw that the change to adding roleplaying to the game was inevitable (and it started long before White Wolf was incorporated, by the way) and that shouting against the wind was fruitless.
So too, I think, it will be with 4e. WotC no longer values that certain older segment of their previous customer base as much as they would like to recruit that phat younger MMO crowd. That is a fine business decision and one I cannot fault. That older crowd, however, has a right to comment and complain about that rejection. (And the manner in which they were rejected in the PR fiasco that introduced 4e) (The same thing overall, btw, happened with the switch from 2e to 3e, although to a smaller extent because 2e unlike 3e was about at the end of its life-cycle. We just didn't have the internet to lash out at one another then and the publications controlled which opinions were printed in their magazines for dissemination)
D&D 4e will never be "My D&D". That's okay. As long it is is **SOMEONES** D&D and the brand and the name remains strong, I will be happy.
I can still write, design and dream. I can still play *my* D&D.
And I can always venture down to my LGS and pull aside that kid who just finished his 4e session and whisper: "Hey kid, you wanna know about the *real* D&D? Elves are a character class. And THACO rules all".
You may well be right, Teiran, but I find that it is anything but a pointless argument. Would you not agree that - up until 4th edition - the direction *was* to make the game as realistic/simulationist as possible within its own framework of fantasy (Lord knows, sometimes to an almost unplayable fault)?
I began playing with the three little white boxed books in 1976. I have played, extensively, every edition since then. This is really the first time where I can detect a direct and profound shift *away* from attempting to simulate some sort of "reality" that can be related to some sort of "real world" context towards simply making rules because the limitations of that reality seemed to chafe at some.
THAT, I think, is something that sticks in the craw of many, and is why 4e is not getting the reception that I suspect WotC and many others thought it would. It is, to be sure, a profound shift for those of us who have been playing for years. Then again, we ain't their target customer anymore. :)
It is not at all a separate game, nor is it unworthy of the name (and other hyperbole) but in concept, its shift has made it in some ways a very *different* one.
And WotC did not handle introducing those differences very well.
That, of course, is another thread entirely.
Scott Betts wrote:
No, you can play it however you want.
Why, thank you!
Scott Betts wrote:
I was just giving advice.
Actually, you told me to go play another game, because I (and others) did not play it in the manner you thought it should be played. That is what raised hackles, if you had not noticed. :)
Scott Betts wrote:
If you're going to play D&D but ignore all the tools it gives you to resolve a situation and then complain that you haven't been given any tools to resolve the situation, though, why are you even bothering?
Uhm, Scott? Who's complaining about any tools? My complaints were more about your rigid position (okay, and the thought that there is some magic force that keeps a farmer from ever EVER being able to in any manner gain enough money to buy something "epic" like plate armor. Unless, of course, he is an "epic" farmer, I suppose. Anyway...) on how the game should be played.
We can certainly argue rules, specifics and what makes sense in the game versus how it works in the real world, but if you think you are going to influence anyone in the game community in a positive way by telling them that they ***have*** to conform to your view of how D&D should be played ("play another game") then I think you are in for a frustrating time of it.
In any case, I've enjoyed the conversation. Watch those penalties and good luck to you.
Scott Betts wrote:
So, you are telling me to either play the game the way you see it should be played, or go play something else? :1
You know, E. Gary Gygax also said something similar once, back in the AD&D days. Despite that attitude, and thanks to players of my generation, there is still a viable D&D game (some might argue at least two, now) still available and still being played.
Rightly or wrongly.
You REALLY are not winning this one, you know. :)
You inserted the word "founded" and attempted to portray the issue in a completely different subtext. This would derail the discussion, were the respondent be forced to argue against a position he did not take.
Straw man argument.
10 yards. Loss of down.
Will the Timekeeper please reset the clock to 15:00?
Scott Betts wrote:
No. Plate mail is affordable to PCs. It is not affordable to the average joe. The PCs are heroes. They wear heroic equipment.
Not that I am going to jump into this thread to refute you, others are doing that quite well enough, but I just want to be clear that you are sure that you want to make the above quote the lynch-pin of your argument?
Gotta admit that between work and a recent back injury, I haven't played much in the last 60 days. So, I did what anyone would do, I went game-shopping.
Went to the local huge game store. One 4e campaign still looking for players and three 3e games still going from before 4e's release.
Went to the local large comic book store that also sells games. They advertise a weekly session to help people make up 4e characters and get to know the rules. According to the manager, no one has shown up since the first session right after the rules release.
So yeah, it might just be here, but you are not the only one having a hard time finding a 4e group.
I understand your dilemma, but remember. . .
. . . the decision you make today will affect the future control of your immortal soul.
But to be serious for a moment:
It's Just A Game.
Go with what makes you happy. We all make a lot of mistakes and poor choices in our lives, but the only ones we regret when we get old are the ones where we didn't make a choice at all.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Meh, I prefer to run them like they house some weird alien intelligence, not like they're people.
Kirth, I don't disagree with you at all. Some of the choice might predicate on the kind of players you have, too. I've had both serious and silly intelligent items, depending on the group.
After all, the idea is to have fun. :)
I do recall, back in the mists of time, giving out an intelligent one-handed mace from a Judges Guild module. The mace was named "Pacifist" and would berate the character every time he used it.
"Oh! Oh! A kobold! A little-bitty kobold! You feel better now? Feel like a MAN now? Oh, I'll just bet you do! I'm so happy for you. Now, wipe these brains from my head and put me away. . . no! No, I MEAN it! Put me AWAY! I'm not speaking to you anymore."