|
If 3.5e can be considered D&D, so can 4e.
I hate to say you are truly right. The owner of the franchise decides what is or what is not D&D and since WotC is the owner they have all the right to do what they want with it. It is up to us to say if we play it or not. So we should say "I play classic d20 system" or "D&D 3.5 edition" I don't care a carrot if they destroy the game or blown it, I have what I need and that is all what cares to me.
I disagree. If I owned 10,000 acres of forest I could call it "tundra" if I wished and try to sell you 10,000acres of tundra, but the fact remains that it is definitely a forest.
The label isn't what defines something.
This is a case of different understandings of the same thing. Yes, WotC says "this is D&D" then it's D&D. There is absolute proof of that. They are the ones who, commercially, define what is D&D. As for what the consumers/customers/fans/players/whatever *consider* to be D&D... that's a very subjective situation and cannot be nailed down unanimously. Some people feel that anything that doesn't have an Elf class isn't truly D&D. Others feel that 3.x isn't really D&D because for them it is defined through their enjoyment of 2e.
It ends up being an argument about which is better... Coke Classic or New Coke... and we know that's futile. :)
For the last several years (probably since Hasbro bought WoTC) AAFES/Bookmark has stocked the WotC d20 material by default...
My how times have changed. I never once saw any sort of RPG (save maybe computer) in any post or base exchange I ever visited.
For the last several years (probably since Hasbro bought WoTC) AAFES/Bookmark has stocked the WotC d20 material by default...My how times have changed. I never once saw any sort of RPG (save maybe computer) in any post or base exchange I ever visited.
Like I said, it's only been the last several years. Then again, the military (like colleges) has a high precentage of gamers, so it's profitable for AAFES.
It ends up being an argument about which is better... Coke Classic or New Coke... and we know that's futile. :)
But their New Coke doesn't have caffeine in it and smells of oranges.
Yeah, but the story of the gnome, it's like if they were taking the guard or the tackle out of the football team: nonody really cares about them, but they're part of the game anyway...
And the tiefling addition, it's like playing with that reduced team on a canadian football field, makes no sense...
:)
Yeah, but the story of the gnome, it's like if they were taking the guard or the tackle out of the football team: nonody really cares about them, but they're part of the game anyway...
I care about them. A lot. And I'm not nobody. Nor am I the only one who likes gnomes.
I care about them. A lot. And I'm not nobody. Nor am I the only one who likes gnomes.Yeah, but the story of the gnome, it's like if they were taking the guard or the tackle out of the football team: nonody really cares about them, but they're part of the game anyway...
I was just trying to make a stupid analogy. I like gnomes and played some gnome characters as well :) WOTC, bring back our gnomes!
|
|
It ends up being an argument about which is better... Coke Classic or New Coke... and we know that's futile. :)
But their New Coke doesn't have caffeine in it and smells of oranges.
True... and that's a good analogy. If Crush had come out with a Cola/orange hybrid around the same time Coca-Cola stopped producing Coke altogether... do you think that people would have trashed the Crush product so heavily? Probably not, because they would recognize it as a totally different product.
I think that's most of the problem here... people aren't recognizing D&D4 as a brand new product, but are expecting it to be a valid "upgrade path". I don't see it that way... I see it as a totally new offering while my preferred rules are having their support term ended.
|
|
It ends up being an argument about which is better... Coke Classic or New Coke... and we know that's futile. :)
Great. I am glad you agree.
Thats why I said labels do not define a thing. But the fact remains there is a difference between new coke and classic coke. We could do a lab analysis for explicit quantitative differences. There is a real difference. Coke says there is a difference. But both are called "coke".
Same thing here. There are differences. WotC explicitly says there are differences, so much so they say you shouldn't convert but start over. Its different.
Do not try and tell us its the same thing when even WoTC is telling us its different.
And yes, it is an argument about which is better. And it is not Futile. When was the last time you saw New Coke on the shelves my friend?
|
|
And yes, it is an argument about which is better. And it is not Futile. When was the last time you saw New Coke on the shelves my friend?
The futility aspect comes from the fact that nobody will convince anyone on the other side to change his or her opinion. It obviously worked with Coca-Cola (although I still think Coke Classic didn't taste the same as it did before New Coke came along...).
And I'm not sure if you understood my position on this whole thing... I am not switching to 4e and I don't like the direction it is taking. I agree with your point about it being so different that it probably shouldn't be called D&D (or should have a swanky subtitle... like D&D: Burning Crusade, perhaps). However, trying to do anything about it now, other than to register displeasure and point out how we think this is a big mistake so we can, perhaps, say "nyah, told you so!" later *is* futile inasmuch as WotC isn't going to (and can't) change horses midstream on anything at this point. Too many decisions had already been made before the announcement was even made.
Does that mean I'll stop discussing it? Probably not.. I like a good debate sometimes. ;)
It ends up being an argument about which is better... Coke Classic or New Coke... and we know that's futile. :)True... and that's a good analogy.But their New Coke doesn't have caffeine in it and smells of oranges.
But not my analogy. I just found it and resolved to kill it, and then beat up its corpse.
Always try out your analogies to be sure the other side can't turn it around on you ;-)
|
|
It ends up being an argument about which is better... Coke Classic or New Coke... and we know that's futile. :)True... and that's a good analogy.But their New Coke doesn't have caffeine in it and smells of oranges.
But not my analogy. I just found it and resolved to kill it, and then beat up its corpse.
Always try out your analogies to be sure the other side can't turn it around on you ;-)
Analogies are supposed to work both directions. :)
It ends up being an argument about which is better... Coke Classic or New Coke... and we know that's futile. :)But their New Coke doesn't have caffeine in it and smells of oranges.True... and that's a good analogy. If Crush had come out with a Cola/orange hybrid around the same time Coca-Cola stopped producing Coke altogether... do you think that people would have trashed the Crush product so heavily? Probably not, because they would recognize it as a totally different product.
But if Coca-Cola Co. stopped producing Classic Coke and started maketing a cola/orange hybrid as "New Coke," they would definitely be trashed. That is what WotC is doing with D&D.
I think that's most of the problem here... people aren't recognizing D&D4 as a brand new product
We understand quite well. 4e is a new product attempting to use an old name, even though there are vast differences in flavor. That is our gripe with WotC.
|
|
I think that's most of the problem here... people aren't recognizing D&D4 as a brand new product
We understand quite well. 4e is a new product attempting to use an old name, even though there are vast differences in flavor. That is our gripe with WotC.
And by "people" I obviously meant "some people" - the ones who don't see it are the ones who are stunned that we aren't going to immediately jump on the bandwagon - that's not to say that there are people who do see it like this and still want to switch, but those people should just as easily be able to argue switching to a totally different company's system.
It's not like a software upgrade, it's like changing to totally different software that can't read your old files. Sure, a document is still called a document, but my v3.5 document can't be read by my 4.0 program, and the company has told me they won't be writing an importer for my old 3.5 documents. What if Microsoft Word 2007 couldn't open the documents of any previous version of Word? Why, we'd all think that was absolutely ridiculous, I suspect. Of course, to complete that analogy, they would also have to not include a way to bold or centre, but promise them in the next major release one year from now... ;)
We're both stating the same point - I'm not arguing with you, but you seemed to misunderstand my earlier point. We're on the same not-liking-4e's-direction side... :)
I’m wasn’t sure which thread to put the following in, so I hope this one’s OK.
Last night, I had the following thought. It seems that, based on the marketing, WotC are aiming to grab a younger market (say 10-year olds as opposed to 15-year olds) and a broader market (ie. the “cool” kids).
Eg. “Look at this! This is the new, improved D&D! 4E is the best ever! Only geeks and nerds played previous editions! We don’t even want their money! Here’s the new Player’s Handbook!”
I have to be honest: I don't really understand this. In my experience, "cool" kids have played D&D through all of its versions. No, I'm not under any delusions of my coolness. I was (and am) one of the nerds, and I'm proud. However, over half of my most successful gaming group (started over 25 years ago, and still play sporadically) were football players in high school, one played football for a college team, and 2 or 3 did the whole frat thing in college.
I think that's most of the problem here... people aren't recognizing D&D4 as a brand new productWe understand quite well. 4e is a new product attempting to use an old name, even though there are vast differences in flavor. That is our gripe with WotC.And by "people" I obviously meant "some people" - the ones who don't see it are the ones who are stunned that we aren't going to immediately jump on the bandwagon
And by "we" I meant the majority of the people on this forum that express concerns with the changes that are being projected for 4e, from the tone of their posts.
We're both stating the same point - I'm not arguing with you, but you seemed to misunderstand my earlier point. We're on the same not-liking-4e's-direction side... :)
From the context it seemed you were you were in the "4e is brand new and completely superior to the old, dumb versions of D&D; why complain about the changes, it's still D&D" camp, who never actually acknowledge the central point of our reservations. Sorry.
4E is going to have nukes? Awesome!
I played a D&D adventure long ago when my Magic User found a big sphere.
He fiddled with it and it started counting down.
In those days there was a chance that you could Teleport low, appear inside a solid object and die.
As that had happened to him before, he was reluctant to risk the Teleport, so ran as fast as he could.
He learnt a valuable lesson. You can't outrun a neutron bomb blast.