Lots of wise stuff...
Beautifully said.
I think Dungeon Grrrl is a wise, insightful, perceptive person, and has gotten every point spot-on. I second all her expectations and fears :)
No one change we've heard about scares me. The idea DnD is going to become a combat emulation does.
I heartily recommend this for one of the best posts of this week.
I've played those MMORPGs, to try 'em out. They're okay. They can be fun. But they're not role-playing.
Uh uh.
They're fantasy combat simulators where you fight AI opponents. You fight a big boss, and people are discussing football, TV, and who they slept with last night.. It's strategic button pushing with a cool graphical interface.
The "haggling in the village marketplace" is replaced by player driven trading that is, when it's not broken by gold sellers, is more akin to the real world stock market.
Rules are toolsets. If 4th edition can't handle the type of game I want to run, it's not for me.
Wow...Dungeon Grrrl's post was really great. I wholehartedly agree with pretty much everything she said regarding fears about 4th Edition.
And thanks for the insight into the new SW game. Now I need to go buy that Saga Edition book I had my eye on. :)
|
My biggest problem Mr. Mona...Saving throws being tossed out the door. I polled all my gamers. And not a one thinks removing saving throws is a good idea.
Wotc made the comment in there Rules article about how they were changing saving throws that "saving throws are drama that players don't need or want" this the biggest load of BS I have ever heard. it takes that power out of the players hands and puts it in the dm's and the min/maxer's. streamlined my butt....sounds more like dumbed down
I agree with that. It's possibly the worst 4.0 mechanic I've seen to date.
With the release of the game still several months away it makes sense not to give conrete answers. They still are making changes here and there, so how can you make a concrete answer. As the days go by more things will start to be concrete.
My only real concern is the DI thing. I run on Macs and hear the DI won't support MAC, plus I don't like the idea of having to pay extra for stuff that should be in the books. However, I'm sure that the books (at least the core ones) will have enough good material to run a good game.
Imagine what would happen if they stuck with 3E. They are pretty much out of good ideas for new 3E products. Every new release becomes more and more redundant and unnessesary. The companies sales would eventually decline to the point where they would no longer be viable. In order to remain successful they need to reinvent themselves. The filler they are putting out between editions is likely a waste of money (I'm looking at you dungeoneers suvival guide), but I think the new core material will be good (it better be considering all the money they are putting into it).
I was hoping that you would weigh in over here Turin. I was contemplating a Threadjacking to call you over this way earlier.
Turin does bring up a REALLY good point though. No matter how much Wiz would like to keep things 'secret', they are hurting themselves more and more by not giving us concrete answers. Come on, we are people that roll dice to Sense Motive, of course we are going to endlessly speculate about whats going on behind the scenes. Especially when those answers that they do give us sound like complete BS you can't blame us thinking 'Incompetent' when that is what we see presented thus far from them.
Imagine what would happen if they stuck with 3E. They are pretty much out of good ideas for new 3E products. Every new release becomes more and more redundant and unnessesary. The companies sales would eventually decline to the point where they would no longer be viable. In order to remain successful they need to reinvent themselves. The filler they are putting out between editions is likely a waste of money (I'm looking at you dungeoneers suvival guide), but I think the new core material will be good (it better be considering all the money they are putting into it).
3.X has all of the crunch it needs... too much in fact. I'm hoping that a company (preferably Paizo) continues to put out 3.X adventures, game aids and setting material.
There's plenty of room for these types of projects and I have plenty of interest in such products.
I realize that, financially, WotC NEEDS to chart a new course. I just wish every other publisher of D&D materials didn't have to sail that same course...
Imagine what would happen if they stuck with 3E. They are pretty much out of good ideas for new 3E products. Every new release becomes more and more redundant and unnessesary.
Um, with all due respect, if they can't come up with product ideas in a multiverse of infinite possibilities, they have no business being D&D game designers.
Someone else may have said it but it bears repeating: they've assured us that there will be NO conversion from 3.5 to 4.0, which means every single book I own from 3.0 onward is filled with useless mechanics and game information.
Now, I know they've said that it's difficult but possible to convert, but the very attitude behind revamping the game to such an extreme degree that all existing material changes from game resources to fluff... well, that's thoughtless, and it worries me specifically. I'm also upset by the way they're planning on marketing these 4e teaser books that force gamers to buy tiny little pieces of their magical new game mechanics in order to have any real clue what to expect. Why not show us everything at once, when it's ready? And why charge us the price of a book to essentially give us a teaser trailer that adds nothing to our 3.5 games?
Christopher
Imagine what would happen if they stuck with 3E. They are pretty much out of good ideas for new 3E products.
Interestingly enough, when they Scott Rouse posted his famous "Brand Manager of Fluff" thread at EN World, there was actually a large amount of overlap in what people wanted to see, and none of it had been tapped yet in 3.5.
A "Draconomicon" style book on Fey, Giants, and a Fiendish Codex III came up over and over, as well as a Forgotten Realms regional sourcebook on the Cold Lands and the areas beyond Faerun. There was also a lot of support for a one shot updated World of Greyhawk campaign setting book, as well as support for more "one shot" 3.5 updates of older campaign worlds.
The concensus seemed to be that WOTC might shoot itself in the foot if it jumped completely back into another campaign setting line, but doing one updated campaign hardcover a year wouldn't cause problems.
I completely disagree with you. There are essentially a few kinds of books produced for dnd.
1. Core rules (#1 seller) Must have
2. Rule Supplements (complete series, spell compendium, phb II). This type of book is good because it catches the interest of both players and dms, so if these products are good they will sell well. But how many complete series books do you need? How many feats and new spells does the game need? How many prestige classes? There is an upper limit on these things, and once that limit is hit sales drop. Sure phb 2 might sell well and the complete warrior might sell well. But is phb IV going to be a big seller? How about the Complete Druid? After a while these books either become redundant or overspecialized, and only appeal to a very select audience If I have monster manual 1-3, will having monster manual 4-5 really add much to my game (or at least will it add enough to justify spending $40, when I can just get a pirated copy off the net for free)? Not likely, unless its really, really good.
3. World Sourcebooks. This type of book you can make until the cows come home because there are always new worlds to explore. However, they generally appeal more to a dm than player, and if I am a dm and buy a couple of good world books am I going to keep buying more and more? For instance if I buy the Eberron book and in the Xendric supplement and I start my new campaign focusing on adventures in Xendric, do I really need the new Dark Sun book that comes out? Do I need the new Underdark sourcebook for the Realms? No. So although these products might be well and good the more that are produced the more they are just competing against one another.
4. Adventures: This type of book is probably the lowest seller. DMs will buy them, but if the players keep buying all the latest adventures then they kind of ruin the game for themselves. I have Pathfinder Subscription, and am currently finishing up Savage TIde. I don't need new adventures right now, but I like Paizo so I keep my subscription active. However given that I will soon have RotL and Crimson Throne, is it worth my while to go out and buy Expedition Castle Greyhaw and Demonweb Pits. I've decided the answer is no. Sure I like the author and sure I think they are good adventures, but I doubt I will ever get to using them. Am I going to buy the new hard cover FR adventures? No. For the same reason.
In conclusion, yes you can keep producing products for an rpg, but the more you put out the more they compete against one another and the less viable and essential they become to your average gamer.
Rifts is a good example of a game that has continuously put out supplements with little thought about actually trying to improve the rules of the game. I like the idea of the worlds, but in my mind the mechanics of the game are too flawed to make it fun to run. If they had taken the time to actually do redo the game and make it work better instead of pumping out sourcebook after sourcebook it might actually be a popular game.
Um, with all due respect, if they can't come up with product ideas in a multiverse of infinite possibilities, they have no business being D&D game designers.
I
magine what would happen if they stuck with 3E. They are pretty much out of good ideas for new 3E products. Every new release becomes more and more redundant and unnessesary.
Well that's called the phb and it will come out in the spring. No one is forcing you to buy the teaser books. If I were you I'd flip through them at the store, but not buy them.
As for useless mechanics. Well the same thing happened with 2nd to 3rd edition too. I think I still have some of those old supplements somewhere. However, I can't imagine that you don't feel like you have enough 3E supplements and options to keep a campaign interesting for the next 10-20 years, so if you don't want them to be useless just keep playing 3E and spend your money on something else.
Someone else may have said it but it bears repeating: they've assured us that there will be NO conversion from 3.5 to 4.0, which means every single book I own from 3.0 onward is filled with useless mechanics and game information.
Now, I know they've said that it's difficult but possible to convert, but the very attitude behind revamping the game to such an extreme degree that all existing material changes from game resources to fluff... well, that's thoughtless, and it worries me specifically. I'm also upset by the way they're planning on marketing these 4e teaser books that force gamers to buy tiny little pieces of their magical new game mechanics in order to have any real clue what to expect. Why not show us everything at once, when it's ready? And why charge us the price of a book to essentially give us a teaser trailer that adds nothing to our 3.5 games?
Christopher
Well it's not popular like dnd is. ie... It's not popular enough to warrant a major corporation buying it up. It's not popular enough that I can find the core books in chapters. Nor is popular enough that I know anyone who is playing it. So I guess our definitions of popular are a bit different.
I completely disagree with you. There are essentially a few kinds of books produced for dnd.This may be the first time we're on the same page here, P.H....
Except for one thing - for all it's flaws, Rifts IS a popular game. I know several people who love it. I'm not one of them (I probably should be - I've gamed with Siembieda running twice and grew up in the same area...:D), but they're out there.
At any rate I'm not in bad shape. If the rpg market collapsed today and no new books were ever put out. I will still be running a fun weekly game 10 years from now (assuming I don't loose my players). I don't really want to see any new 3E products anyhow because I'm already drowning in them. 4E could be a welcome change if its good, as it will get me out of the current mire, and I won't have players proposing, feral/thri kreen/frenzied berserker blah blah blahs as PC for at leat a year or two.
Yes but which will sell better- "The feyonomicon" or a new players handbook? Even if the new phb flopped it would still way outsell the feyonomicon and the fiendish codex III. I for one would never bye a source book all about the fey. I might pick one up about Yugoloths or giants, but not fey. Stupid fey. Even these I'm not that likely to buy as I pretty much am running all my adventures from modules these days and they tend to have everything I need in them, so supplements like that aren't really that useful to me.
As a side note here is my biggest gripe about WoTC. The fact that they charge nearly the same price for PDFs of their books as they do a hard copy. WTF! Those things should be selling at 1/3 the cost. It's robbery and I will never buy one of their e-books! If they priced them reasonably I might actually buy a few of those extra books I don't really need (and won't buy as books) as PDFs. But when they try to charge me $30 for them I'd prefer to just get a burned copy for free.
Imagine what would happen if they stuck with 3E. They are pretty much out of good ideas for new 3E products.Interestingly enough, when they Scott Rouse posted his famous "Brand Manager of Fluff" thread at EN World, there was actually a large amount of overlap in what people wanted to see, and none of it had been tapped yet in 3.5.
A "Draconomicon" style book on Fey, Giants, and a Fiendish Codex III came up over and over, as well as a Forgotten Realms regional sourcebook on the Cold Lands and the areas beyond Faerun. There was also a lot of support for a one shot updated World of Greyhawk campaign setting book, as well as support for more "one shot" 3.5 updates of older campaign worlds.
The concensus seemed to be that WOTC might shoot itself in the foot if it jumped completely back into another campaign setting line, but doing one updated campaign hardcover a year wouldn't cause problems.
Well the white wolf games are pretty popular. I can find those in chapters sometimes. But dnd is certainly the most popular, though not necessarily the best game out there by any means.
Well it's not popular like dnd is. ie... It's not popular enough to warrant a major corporation buying it up. It's not popular enough that I can find the core books in chapters. Nor is popular enough that I know anyone who is playing it. So I guess our definitions of popular are a bit different.
In comparison to Dungeons and Dragons, NO RPG is popular... Nor ever was nor ever will be...
HERO/Champions might have come close in the 90s (though FUZION almost killed it), and GURPS might register a blip, but AFAICT, that's about it.
And D&D was not bought by a major corporation - TSR was, by WotC to bail them out of some monumentally idiotic corporate maneuvers... And WotC was then bought by Hasbro, not for D&D, but for Pokemon...
Please be specific.
What SPECIFIC changes are bothering you?
I can say with some certainty that our world will have elves that do not live in the forest, and I strongly suspect it will have chaotic evil succubi. I also think that eladrins are a planar race, and they aren't really welcome on Golarion in the same way they will soon be a part of the Forgotten Realms, etc.
Obviously, warforged will not be a part of the setting, and gnomes will be.
So what worries you about what you've heard so far?
--Erik
I don't post often but thought that this warrants a response. Not really having seen enough real rules of 4E I am unable to point out rules specific problems that I have with 4E.
However, the feel I get from the previews, playtest reports, podcasts and other little tidbits they let us have at this stage is that when you build a character it will be for a very specific role with little option for customization. The one thing I love most about 3.5 is that you have a very basis fundamental rules set that governs the operation of a character in the game world but with the options available to you you are able to craft your character to be virtually whatever you want. However, the 4E they are trying to sell to me does not seem to have that level of robustness. i.e. if you create a wizard then your wizard will have the same general abilities as any other wizard and your ability to customize them will be limited to some very specific options based on that class.
Same thing with monsters. I love that fact that when i am designing an encounter for a high-level group of characters that I can create a an group of elite orcs or advance a displacer beast enough to make it a challenge. I don't like the fact that the monsters in 4E do not appear to be customizable to that extent. Instead, it seems that we will be given a monster entry that will have a number of variations on that monster to serve multiple purposes (e.g Orc Warrior, Orc Shaman, Orc Chieftan) but will be limited in how much they can be tailored to specific groups.
I have a feeling that this is to create a level of standardization to better enable promotion of a strong Organized Play environment and to make D&D into a very plug n' play type of game, but it just does not fit
into what I like to play as D&D.
Yes but which will sell better- "The feyonomicon" or a new players handbook? Even if the new phb flopped it would still way outsell the feyonomicon and the fiendish codex III. I for one would never bye a source book all about the fey. I might pick one up about Yugoloths or giants, but not fey. Stupid fey. Even these I'm not that likely to buy as I pretty much am running all my adventures from modules these days and they tend to have everything I need in them, so supplements like that aren't really that useful to me.
You make a good point, and I'll certainly not argue that history bears out that core rulebooks outsell everything else published in a given edition of the game, and that those rulebooks provide a massive surge to sales.
However, what I will be interested in seeing, and I by no means know the answer to this, is if putting out a new edition this close to a previous one, will not become more problematic than it might seem at first.
There may be an initial burst of sales, in fact, I'll be very surprised if there isn't. But will there be any interest in ancillary material? And further more, how does it affect the paradigm of "core books" selling well when you introduce the notion that there will be a set of "core" books every year?
Further, non-core books tended to be the home of the fluff. 4th Edition has made if rather clear that fluff can change rather dramatically. What if this lack of constancy in backstory kills the drive to buy anything driven by fluff? "I was going to get the Feynomicon, but it says the Fey are from the Feywild, and I'm wondering if in 5th edition they will come from the planet Feytopia . . . I guess I'll just skip this one for now."
Many defenders of 4th edition have pointed out that if you are a fan of the current status quo of the D&D backstory, that you can just ignore the backstory, but the problem with this, for WOTC is, this means that the products that have to make money have to revolve around mechanics, adventures, ancillary products (minis, tiles), and the DI.
I guess in the end I'm saying that it may not have made as much money in the short term, but a new edition may have less of a payoff in the long term, depending on how they attempt to pull it off.
I could see this being a big concern, but I think you are going to be proven wrong about those fears when you see the new rules. I think that you will still have at least as many options for customizing characters and monsters as you have in 3E or at least you will once they have released enough supplements.
Please be specific.
What SPECIFIC changes are bothering you?
I can say with some certainty that our world will have elves that do not live in the forest, and I strongly suspect it will have chaotic evil succubi. I also think that eladrins are a planar race, and they aren't really welcome on Golarion in the same way they will soon be a part of the Forgotten Realms, etc.
Obviously, warforged will not be a part of the setting, and gnomes will be.
So what worries you about what you've heard so far?
--Erik
I don't post often but thought that this warrants a response. Not really having seen enough real rules of 4E I am unable to point out rules specific problems that I have with 4E.
However, the feel I get from the previews, playtest reports, podcasts and other little tidbits they let us have at this stage is that when you build a character it will be for a very specific role with little option for customization. The one thing I love most about 3.5 is that you have a very basis fundamental rules set that governs the operation of a character in the game world but with the options available to you you are able to craft your character to be virtually whatever you want. However, the 4E they are trying to sell to me does not seem to have that level of robustness. i.e. if you create a wizard then your wizard will have the same general abilities as any other wizard and your ability to customize them will be limited to some very specific options based on that class.
Same thing with monsters. I love that fact that when i am designing an encounter for a high-level group of characters that I can create a an group of elite orcs or advance a displacer beast enough to make it a challenge. I don't like the fact that the monsters in 4E do not appear to be customizable to that extent. Instead, it seems that we will be given a monster entry that will have a number of variations on that monster to serve multiple purposes (e.g Orc Warrior, Orc Shaman, Orc Chieftan) but will be...
I could see this being a big concern, but I think you are going to be proven wrong about those fears when you see the new rules. I think that you will still have at least as many options for customizing characters and monsters as you have in 3E or at least you will once they have released enough supplements.
I hope so, but I did not get that impression from a podcast I listened to with Mike Mearls on the subject. But it is also quite apparent that they have not fully settled on a final rules set yet. In any event, it is going to have to be damn good an uberglorious game for me to drop 3.5 and dive into 4E. I am more than satisfied with it as it stands (yes I realize there are some annoying things about the system that can use some revision but ... well .. I like to tinker so not a problem) and have a enough material to last me well into my retirement.
THe release of 4E is going to be a real s$%~storm.
As usual, Dungeon Grrrl says something very insightful.
Thanks! ^_^
Mikey, I blush...
Erik asked, I figured he deserved to know. If wizards can't fabricate, clerics can't augury and *some* class doesn't have a lore ability, I can't run my existing games in 4e.
Period.
As usual, Dungeon Grrrl says something very insightful.
Thanks! ^_^
Mikey, I blush...
Erik asked, I figured he deserved to know. If wizards can't fabricate, clerics can't augury and *some* class doesn't have a lore ability, I can't run my existing games in 4e.
Period.
I'm hopping on board the Dungeon Grrl fan club, of all the posts I've read, this one really resonated with me.
Ah, but we're not the "Mikey"... lol ;)
I'm hopping on board the Dungeon Grrl fan club, of all the posts I've read, this one really resonated with me.You mean you didn't join up when her head-dressed bandage wrapped self first appeared? For shame...
Okay Sectie, now I really *am* blushing.
heh. I wondered earlier why i couldn't start my own cult, and one of the posters here told me IU shouldn't give up so easily...
Well, Hero/Champions is still popular, just not on the East Coast of the US.
In the midwest, Texas, and the west coast, the game does much better. Ironically, the company is now east coast oriented, which may drive the brand forward better. Since I actually freelance for them, I'll just say that right now, they're in a MUCH better position than it seems.
With D+D 4th Edition on the horizon, they stand to pick up a lot of disgruntled people who don't like the new rules, as well as getting into license-based agreements with 3rd party publishers.
Currently, they're doing PS 238, and that should be interesting to see.
If the new game mentioned here is an electronic DnD, then that's what's wrong with 4e. It's deisgned to be coded, and nothing else.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=31322
If the new game mentioned here is an electronic DnD, then that's what's wrong with 4e. It's deisgned to be coded, and nothing else.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=31322
Nice find Dungeon Grrrl.
[sarcasm]Gosh I wonder why EN World isn't all over this?![/sarcasm]
The language of the article does seem to reinforce the belief that by redesigning the game, they've also found a way to tighten control over the IP. Which to my way of thinking = suckage.
Give me freedom (in the form of Pathfinder) or give me death!
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=31322
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=31322Linkyfied for ease.
Thanks, 'Chanter. I'm bad at stuff like that. :D
Well, Hero/Champions is still popular, just not on the East Coast of the US.
In the midwest, Texas, and the west coast, the game does much better. Ironically, the company is now east coast oriented, which may drive the brand forward better. Since I actually freelance for them, I'll just say that right now, they're in a MUCH better position than it seems.
On a complete threadjack...
Once upon a time, when HERO was owned by I.C.E. and headquartered in Charlottesville, I was in college in Richmond (an hour down the road) and HERO was the game of choice for all of us.
I miss those days in a big way. :`( At least as far as gaming is concerned.
Still, having recently splurged on the current HERO system -- holy moley, has it gotten ridiculous. 0.o A simple little thing like "being one size up from a normal person" requires half a page of powers! If ever a game needed streamlining, it's the monster that HERO has turned into.
-The Gneech
Still, having recently splurged on the current HERO system -- holy moley, has it gotten ridiculous. 0.o A simple little thing like "being one size up from a normal person" requires half a page of powers! If ever a game needed streamlining, it's the monster that HERO has turned into.
I still think 4th Ed. HERO was one of the best systems ever, for just about any sort of game you wanted to run. It's an even better "universal" rules set, IMO, than GURPS. Unfortunately, it seems that HERO has followed Shadowrun down the "break abilities/powers down to ever finer subcategories of themselves" road.
Still, having recently splurged on the current HERO system -- holy moley, has it gotten ridiculous. 0.o A simple little thing like "being one size up from a normal person" requires half a page of powers! If ever a game needed streamlining, it's the monster that HERO has turned into.I still think 4th Ed. HERO was one of the best systems ever, for just about any sort of game you wanted to run. It's an even better "universal" rules set, IMO, than GURPS. Unfortunately, it seems that HERO has followed Shadowrun down the "break abilities/powers down to ever finer subcategories of themselves" road.
Yup -- we're right on the same page! :)
-The Gneech