Ok. Personally I found more insulting comments here. I'm am suprised you didn't quote his claims that the person was cheating, because that is insulting. This is getting sad with people list every percieved insult.
Just to clarify, the person is cheating. Die rolls only made either when no one's around or done secretly when around people? He's cheating.
Sorry, that's just what I believe.
People who just luckily roll high piss me off more than cheaters.
Final Cut?where did it go?
...Then, once we saw the concept art Bill O'Connor provided for tieflings, we knew that we had to commit to including tieflings as a PC race, rather than just hopeful it would work out (more on that in a future Design & Development column). And what class would tieflings naturally gravitate to? A class that acquired scary powers by negotiating , pacts with shadowy, infenral, or feral patrons? That worked for us. But what we didn't know at the time was how dramatically the warlock class would improve as we progressed through design....I don't find this insulting or infuriating so much as worrisome. What I take from the above statement is that the only reason why the tiefling (and consequently the warlock class) is being included in the initial Player's Handbook as a PC race is because they thought the tiefling art was cool. Ummmmm, what??!! <snip>
Yeah! It's like the time that the guy who invented the game created a monster because he liked some plastic toy from Hong Kong!
Sorry to be so snarky and to pick on Aaron. I understand the sentiment, but really aren't some of us being a bit too thin skinned?
El Skootro
Yeah! It's like the time that the guy who invented the game created a monster because he liked some plastic toy from Hong Kong!
Sorry to be so snarky and to pick on Aaron. I understand the sentiment, but really aren't some of us being a bit too thin skinned?
El Skootro
Thin skinned? I don't know. Confused by this change? Yes. Inventing things because you saw a cool picture is fine. Hell I have done it myself (flying monkies anyone?) but creating things because you saw a cool picture is not what bothers me. It's the almost arbitrary way in which they appear to be making decisions and changing things. That is what concerns me. If they want to invent a new monster because they saw a cool picture that is fine, but deciding to include what was a non-iconic race, and consequently not including one of the previous races, just because of a cool picture doesn't seem like an adequate enough reason for me. I think the other thing about including Tieflings that confuses me is why tieflings? Are they really that popular?
I think those people at WotC do read these messageboards and others. I think they are aware of how there language concerning 4e has upset many people. It is reflected in the articles they are releasing recently. But you can't please everyone, and if people want they find insulting language everywhere.
Thin skinned? I don't know. Confused by this change? Yes. Inventing things because you saw a cool picture is fine. Hell I have done it myself (flying monkies anyone?) but creating things because you saw a cool picture is not what bothers me. It's the almost arbitrary way in which they appear to be making decisions and changing things. That is what concerns me. If they want to invent a new monster because they saw a cool picture that is fine, but deciding to include what was a non-iconic race, and consequently not including one of the previous races, just because of a cool picture doesn't seem like an adequate enough reason for me. I think the other thing about including Tieflings that confuses me is why tieflings? Are they really that popular?
I really shouldn't have posted that as snarkily as I did. I completely understand where you're coming from vis a vis the tieflings. I'm not a fan of the race at all and I don't like the fact that they'll be in the PHB. That being said, I think many of the posts on this thread are needlessly over the top. Infuriating and insulting? Come on. Distressing? Perhaps. Discouraging? Often. Infuriating? Nope.
Again, I shouldn't have picked on Aaron whose post was the model of restraint. I was just trying to illustrate how these (understandable) concerns can quickly devolve into silly and irrational rants.
El Skootro
The tiefling thing is odd to me.
IMO core races should represent the common, mainstream races available. Is the default D&D world now brimming over with fiends mating with humans? That'd be an odd world. They claim to be redesigning the D&D cosmology so that it makes more sense. Why doesn't that standard apply here?
Honestly, I'm just weary of the whole discussion. I don't want to hear about how great 4/e is -- I want to see how great it is. If I do have to hear about it, let's hear it from someone whose livelihood doesn't depend upon us believing the claim. I don't want to hear about playtests by WotC employees -- let someone outside the company try it. I don't want to hear that the choices they made are to create a consistent world -- they just want to make us buy books. I don't want to hear about the failings of 3.5 anymore -- the game works great for me. I don't want to hear that the Digital Initiative is the greatest thing since sliced bread -- so far it only compares favorably with things found in cow pastures.
I don't want to hear anything else from WotC, I just want products. Anything else should be kept to themselves.
Just support my game.
Yeah, I digressed, but it was very cathartic :)
If you’re a player, take a moment right now to thank the merciful designers that turn undead is still in the game.
Yeah, I know, they probably don't mean it, but come on, after all of the flack they have been taking for sounding condescending, don't you think someone would have thought this one was over the top?
Only if you take the quote out of context and are pre-disposed to reading everything that WoTC says in a negative light.
Actually, I was wondering how long it would take before someone quoted that phrase on this thread. In the context of the article, he's using the phrase "merciful designers" to stress both the new lethality of zombies and the importance of turn undead when facing them. The entire article is written in a conversational manner and I think its clear that he's not being all that serious. Here are more examples from the same article:
"Shambling, mindless corpses are getting all gussied up for 4E."
"Although it might be hard to believe that something as simple as an animated carcass needed an overhaul..."
"Every 3rd Edition D&D player thinks of a zombie, at best, as a tough bag of hit points that can take a beating."
"That’s right. I did say, “critical hit.” The zombie is vulnerable to that now, which is sweeter than a head shot in any zombie flick."
"The bigger the zombie, the uglier the thump. And when zombies swarm you, some of them are going to grab you, maybe even pulling you to the ground. That’s not the place to be when the dead come knocking."
"They should be most worried about the pummeling their characters are taking anyway."
"It’s a whole new game, even from the very bottom of the undead barrel. Now if we only had a few zombies that added some spice to the basic shambling corpse recipe."
In short, if Chris Sims writing was devoid of any humor, you'd have a point.
Well the first thing I would point out is that I said I doubt if he meant it to come across this way. My point is not that anyone in the design team is evil or bad, but that a lot of people reading these articles might be put off by some of the turns of phrase being used, and thus they might be a bit more careful.
I'll also point out that the title of this thread may indeed be a bit stronger than I would have posted. I agree that I'm not so much infuriated or even insulted, but troubled and upset by some of the comments.
The fact that it is a conversational tone is what bothers me, to be honest. A lot of these articles are coming across more like a bunch of guys sitting around brainstorming rules for their homebrew rather than professional designers coming up with the best possible version of a classic game.
I'm not saying that these designers aren't professional, but that they don't sound like it. They are trying so hard to remind us that they are gamers just like the rest of us, that they have succeeded to well. They sound like the guys that hang around the hobby shop talking about what they are going to try in their home games, except that its going to be the final world on D&D when they are done.
While I'm on this topic, I have to say that I think that Rob Heinsoo and Rich Baker do come across as more professional in their writing, and that Rich has taken a bit of a beating for decisions the "team" has made because he is the one reporting them.
I think a lot of this "conversational" tone comes from trying to appeal to their hopeful younger new gamers. I doubt that they are following these articles, and it makes me a bit concerned that the rulebooks themselves might be written in this manner. If the rules are brilliant, but you have a term like "at 4th level, fighters get another cool ability," I doubt I'll be able to stomach the read.
"It’s a whole new game ...
The truth shall set us free.
Since it's inception, this game has been about choices. The rules have always been guidelines and players and DM's encouraged to make things up as they go along. No methods of playing were wrong, regardless of what actually happened at the table as long as the DM and players were having fun and telling a good story. Nowhere in any publication regarding this game (and I go waaaaaay back) have I ever read anything so blatantly rude concerning what amounts to a relatively minor personal choice at the gaming table. To think that D&D is in the hands of people with the philosophy that they somehow hold the golden key to game enjoyment and understanding and that anyone that doesn't it see it their way is some kind of dinosaur leaves me with with a feeling I can only describe as nausea.
Apparently not "waaaaaay back" enough.
Dragon (November 1980), p.61: E. Gary Gygax in response to a letter from Eric Robinson questioning EGG's apparent vehemence against individual DMs adapting the game to suit their needs and the inclusion of variant material -
"...you seem to have D&D confused with AD&D. The former promotes alteration and free-wheeling adaptation. The latter absolutely decries it, for the obvious reason that Advanced D&D is a structured and complete game system aimed at uniformity of play world-wide. Either you play AD&D, or you play something else!"
I don't have a reference, unfortunately, but I recall a similar editorial when Dragon became the exclusive magazine for OFFICIAL D&D material, shutting out White Dwarf and other publications of the time.
Yeah, grognard in the gaming context dates back to SSI just a bit before this, and EGG might have been the poster child for grognardism while also pissing off the customer base as a voice of the industry. Still, the antagonistic relationship between D&D and its customer base has a long, storied history that includes TSR wasting a small fortune on shutting down unofficial D&D websites when the term website was reserved exclusively for nerddom. The OGL was a bold move in the wake of this and I assume all here applaud it.
4th Ed. basically boils down to this:
We as players and DMs are free to play what we want the way we want, but the current D&D design team is in a unique (and sometimes unenviable) position to shape the direction of the game and industry. They have a certain responsibility to respect what has come before while still boldly carving out new territory. I, sadly, don't see much of either, unless you count "Yay! Online play!" as something new and groundbreaking. At least they kept the halfling...
|
The announcement has come and gone, the tempest of emotion it brought is beginning to fade, and the excitement is starting to set in.
I found that line from this article frustrating, personally. It's either ignorant or highly dismissive. I don't feel my emotions (or lack thereof) are valued when reading that kind of comment.
The announcement has come and gone, the tempest of emotion it brought is beginning to fade, and the excitement is starting to set in.
I found that line... frustrating, personally. It's either ignorant or highly dismissive. I don't feel my emotions (or lack thereof) are valued when reading that kind of comment.
Ignorant and dismissive, I think. I had precisely the same reaction.
IMO WotC's attitude toward their customer base (us) has ranged from apathy to contempt. Recognizing our frustration and anger, they respond by telling us it has passed. I think not :/
At least they kept the halfling...
This was good?
:P
Things WoTC employees have said that I find highly insulting and infuriating...
Just about every word they've uttered, posted, or printed for over a month now :/
I'm saddened by this whole mess, stretching all the way back to the Dragon and Dungeon decision. The way that was handled lost me as far as WOTC was concerned. Every new bit of news, and the quotes of the designers, only reinforces my decision to NOT support WOTC in any way, from that point forward. They've lost The Way, IMHO.
I AM finishing buying the last few books of 3.5 I feel I need to complete my collection and keep me going for the next few years. I am not buying them retail, because I am trying to send my little individual message. They don't get my money any more.
I AM inspired to branch out and try new games I have been interested in and give them a chance. I'm very excited by M&M, Spirit of the Century, and others.
I AM NOT purchasing anything from WOTC from this point forward. There's enough 3.5 and 3rd party stuff out there to keep me going for literally years. And honestly? The 3rd party stuff, like Paizo, Goodman, and Green Ronin, has been better quality than WOTC for several years now.
That having been said, I hate the division I see displayed on these boards.
You know what? If you are excited about the new game, be excited! I'm happy for you. I've made my decision but I certainly won't hold yours against you or rail against you that you don't see it my way. Enjoy the new system as much as you want.
I hope that you don't hold my decision not to join the party against me. I'm happy with the game as it stands.
Everyone needs to chill. We all love D&D whether it's 1st, 2nd, 3.5, or 4th, Eberron or Dark Sun, Al Qadim or Dragonlance.
It's our game.
If you’re a player, take a moment right now to thank the merciful designers that turn undead is still in the game.Yeah, I know, they probably don't mean it, but come on, after all of the flack they have been taking for sounding condescending, don't you think someone would have thought this one was over the top?
Yeah that was a bad one.
Over all though I like the 4e zombies. They sound like a lot more fun than they are presented now.
undead should always be creepy, at least to a certain degree, even low cr ones. Now granted, sometimes you can make them goofy like army of darkness undead. But They should never seem mundane.
All of Bill's latest Ampersand is insulting. From the "Exciting News" being simply marketing slop of coming releases, to the "While excitement about D&D 4th Edition reaches a fever pitch", culminating with the "I've got a few more things to tell you about, but I'm all out of room for this column". Umm, it's a web page, there's no "room" limitation as you well know. Don't write as if you're a moron or you think the readers are morons.
|
The thing about the Zombie aticle that bugs me is that they make it sound like it is a new idea to have variant Undead. Dragon magazine's October issues have been doing this for years, so to did Ravenloft's VanRichten guides. But here, they act like it is a great new idea.
The are really starting to sound like Stepford Designers, everything 4E is Great, Magnificent, Awesome, Amazing, Terrific,..uh..um..(where's my thesaurs)
|
|
You wouldn't happen to be a juju zombie, would you?
Back on topic. The ampersand article was the same old garbage. It makes you wonder if they didn't plan to release the three books at the same time all along, and initially made it appear they would be put out a book a month. That way, they could "change" their release schedule in "response" to fans. How transparent. At this point, I don't believe anything they do is for our benefit. They want to replace all of us current gamers with WOW junkies, so they don't care if they insult us.
Over all though I like the 4e zombies. They sound like a lot more fun than they are presented now.Hey! I resent that remark. I don't follow 4E rules yet, and I'm a hell of a lot of fun!
I appologise. You can't beat the classic Aberzombie
The most frightening attack from an Aberzombie is the afflicttion to periodontic disease....Thats right, even a Cleric must floss every now and then! :)
Hopefully 4e will be smart and take a page out of Star Wars Saga and allow the "sneak attack" and/or "critical hit" of any creature or object. The idea isn't that your striking a vital organ, its that your strike was just extra spectacular.
"While excitement about D&D 4th Edition reaches a fever pitch...",
This must be why I have a headache....
Things that they will include from previous editions are 'iconic' -- things they will ditch are 'sacred cows'
|
The most frightening attack from an Aberzombie is the afflicttion to periodontic disease....Thats right, even a Cleric must floss every now and then! :)
That's right!! All of you should TREMBLE AT MY ROTTING, UNHOLY MIGHT! QUAKE IN FEAR AS MY FESTERING CLAWS REACH FOR YOU! PEE ON YOURSELVES WHEN MY TEETH FALL OUT AND I ATTEMPT TO GUM YOUR SKULLS OPEN TO GET AT THE JUICY BRAINS INSIDE. CRAP! THE CAPS LOCK BUTTON IS STUCK....
Mmmm...brains.
|
|
>>James Wyatt wrote: The announcement has come and gone, the tempest of emotion it brought is beginning to fade, and the excitement is starting to set in.
Someone else said it first somewhere else, but what comes to mind is this: "What, you think you're some kinda Jedi, waving your hand around like that?"
Emotion: not fading. Excitiment, NONE, monkey-boy.
-DM Jeff