|
The quote I posted above as proof when I was called a lawyer...er...liar...was from your post!!!
For the record, I did not assume that I was in Sebastian's "poo" category although I did wonder if he would put me there.
Sebastian,
You'll have to forgive me if I was a little confused by your first statement here. Confused, because as a soon to be graduate from Lie... err Lawschool.... why would I out you the rest of the Paizo community? Talk about (soon to be) pot calling the kettle black! Actually, as verbally eviscerating as you may be, soon people might call me a bigger... lawyer... and a greater darkness. Look in my profile and see where I'll start working in September. If you think real carefully, you'll see I'm going to be the lowest of the low...
(The poster that inspired me was not a regular, I don't recall your response, but the 'I won't buy it cause I won't be playing it' is not the attitude that irked me. Not buying 4e products because you plan to continue playing 3e is entirely rational and respectable. Not buying Planet Stories or Gurps from Paizo because they convert is douchealicious).
Ok, that makes more sense, sorry that I didn't understand your point right away. You do have a good point. Purchase of non-D&D related products shouldn't be effected by D&D related decisions. If you like GURPS, Planet Stories, etc. then you should buy them regardless of Paizo's decision. I will reiterate that the "hater" (instead of the "hater hater", ha!) crowd has been told to put their money where their mouth is and vote with their cash... We'll some are more ready to vote than others I guess. The Democracy of the Economy... Fun times
douchealicious.
Can I just say for the record that is the most disturbing word I've seen on these boards. The Mother of All Oxymorons, if it qualifies as that...
I hereby deduce you grew up on the East Coast (like myself), as the d- word has never been common in other parts of the country.
[/threadjack]
Back on topic, I just spent hours reading through the whole Gut Check thread. Then I tackled this thread. I didn't fully understand your original point, but you've since explained yourself.
I didn't note as many #1 postings as you implied, but I guess you were just reacting strongly to the ones you did find. I agree on not seeing the need to punish Paizo for making the "wrong" choice on conversion. It's an extremely tough call for them to make, as either way they will lose a chunk of their customers. Many of whom post on these boards. I like the community here, and have enough distance not to mind the extremes. I'll be sad if people walk away from Paizo and/or vanish from the boards just b/c of a choice Paizo is forced to make for financial reasons.
|
|
I absolutely hate the fact that some people (at least three so far) have said that most of the people who said they won't switch to 4th edition really will in 1-2 years.
That is not some kind of forgone conclusion. If you would at least qualify it with a statement like, "I suspect" or "In my opinion, I think many of those blah blah blah". Maybe it will happen, but maybe it won't. I'm sure it just makes those people less likely to convert in any event. Wouldn't want to prove Sebastian right.
As for the people who won't buy from Paizo if they switch editions, why is that wrong? Why is someone a *expletive deleted* because they choose not to buy non-RPG products from Paizo? Is there some kind of contract that we signed saying that when we buy a product from them we're bound to buy from them for eternity? Personally, I support Paizo in all their endeavors because they are a game company. I like Planet Stories. I like to read those stories. I'm reading them instead of other choices. I buy from Paizo because I like the fact that they make 3.5 edition products. If they cease to make such products, I don't care to support them. What's wrong with that? Sure, they 'deserve' support. That's true for a lot of companies. But I personally deal with a lot of crap to keep buying from them that would be easier not to deal with. If I don't have the Pathfinder subscriptions I wouldn't buy anything else from them. The fact that I can't pay in advance irks the hell out of me. If I hadn't already agreed to do the monthly charge to my card for a product I really want, I wouldn't do it for a product that I kind of want.
Of course, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but I don't think people who will stop buying from Paizo because the company switches to 4th edition are doing anything wrong. They're making the decision that is right for them with their money. It's too bad that the decision is bad for Paizo, because they do deserve better. Sure would be nice if we all pooled our money and created an endowment for Paizo. Some billion dollars that they're sitting on to make sure that they never need to worry about money, and they can make sure operating expenses are handled from the interest on investments - but that isn't practical either. The company won't get what it deserves, but it will get what people feel compelled to give them. And if someone isn't going to buy from Paizo once they convert to 4th edition, better let them know now. I'd hate to see Paizo switch and then wonder why 70% of their customers left since only people who supported 4th edition said anything (and of course I realize it could go the other way - 70% could leave if they don't switch). My unofficial finding is that more current Paizo companies want the company to stay 3.x. That may be true for 1, 2, or more years. But I certainly understand that even if a vast majority of players stay with 3.x (or at least Paizo customers) it may limit the possibility of growth (since fewer new players may be introduced to an older system). But that is mere speculation as well, since I have people who WANT to start playing D&D with me (in 3.x) but I simply don't have room for in my group or time to start a new group.
Obviously Paizo has a tough decision, but I don't see any reason for the hater haters. Can't we all just be honest with each other, and be respected for having different opinions. Sure, we should challenge each other especially if an argument is built on false premises or has no logical structure or contradicts the intent (I don't like Gurps because d6s are my favorite die) but to dismiss an argument for no reason because our opinion differs? Paizonians are better than that.
|
I absolutely hate the fact that some people (at least three so far) have said that most of the people who said they won't switch to 4th edition really will in 1-2 years.
It happened with the switch to AD&D, 2E, and 3E (and 3.5). It happened with MegaTraveller. It happened with the switch between RunQuest 2 and 3. It happened when Star Wars went from West End to WotC.
I have seen this pattern so many times I feel no need to qualify my statement. I have been a gamer far too long to be duped by the "I won't switch! You can't make me!" bluster.
I absolutely hate the fact that some people (at least three so far) have said that most of the people who said they won't switch to 4th edition really will in 1-2 years.
That is not some kind of forgone conclusion.
QFT. Statisticly, what is more likely to happen is that they will leave d20 altogether in a few years and play something else. People that read/saw all the previous releases on a given product line and say they don't like X don't turn around later. i.e. If you saw Pirates of the Carrabbian II and didn't like it, are you more or less likely to see PotC III? If you saw Book of 9 Swords and didn't like it, are you more or less likely to play 4E?
D&D is and has always been the "gateway game" to RPGs. Other RPGs are mainly populated with people looking for something less of that style of fantasy, or less rules heavy, or more rules heavy or scifi, or modern, or whatever. In a few years, there will be a new major group of gamers playing other games: those that didn't like the new edition. And yes, many will keep playing 3.5. But there numbers will gradually dwindle.
But it is rather annoying that I keep hearing people say, "Everyone is going to convert to 4E eventually." No. 4E does not have mind control powers and there are more fish in the sea then just the 4E fish, thank you very much.
but I don't think people who will stop buying from Paizo because the company switches to 4th edition are doing anything wrong. They're making the decision that is right for them with their money.
Again, QFT. Paizo is an excellent company and they put out a superb product. I started my Dungeon Subscription because I wanted to learn from the masters as to what quality adventures looked like. Well, 3.5 is going away now and and no one knows if that market will dry up or not. Paizo is going to make a decision on which way to go because it is right for them and their employees. People should decide if they are going to continue to support Paizo based upon their own games and their own budget. Me? Well, I it looks like my freelance writing is leading me away from d20, and I don't think that I will be DMing anytime soon. So why am I still buying their products. Because someday I am going to run a game again and I'd like to already have that game prepped. But frankly, there is already enough available for 3.5 that I don't see a need to convert a product to 3.5. So I'll have to go off of decent adventures rather then superb adventures. I'm ok with that. I'll finish buying the 3.5 adventures and run one of them instead of having a larger assortment to choose from. Plus, I'm not afraid to create my own material. Between the Gazetter and the material I will have accumulated by the conversion date, I'll be able to make my own game.
But I will be making a decision based on what is best for me, just like paizo will be making a decision based on what is best for them. If they are not wrong for making that decision, then why are 3.5 people wrong for making their decision?
Can't we all just be honest with each other, and be respected for having different opinions.
Couldn't have said it better.
It happened with the switch to AD&D, 2E, and 3E (and 3.5). It happened with MegaTraveller. It happened with the switch between RunQuest 2 and 3. It happened when Star Wars went from West End to WotC.
I have seen this pattern so many times I feel no need to qualify my statement. I have been a gamer far too long to be duped by the "I won't switch! You can't make me!" bluster.
It didn't happen for TNE to T4. It didn't happen in droves from RQ3 to MRQ. And I personally never played a game of d20 starwars in my life and I never will. My WEG d6 star wars does me just fine, thank you.
I absolutely hate the fact that some people (at least three so far) have said that most of the people who said they won't switch to 4th edition really will in 1-2 years.
That is not some kind of forgone conclusion.
QFT. Statisticly, what is more likely to happen is that they will leave d20 altogether in a few years and play something else. People that read/saw all the previous releases on a given product line and say they don't like X don't turn around later. i.e. If you saw Pirates of the Carrabbian II and didn't like it, are you more or less likely to see PotC III? If you saw Book of 9 Swords and didn't like it, are you more or less likely to play 4E?
D&D is and has always been the "gateway game" to RPGs. Other RPGs are mainly populated with people looking for something less of that style of fantasy, or less rules heavy, or more rules heavy or scifi, or modern, or whatever. In a few years, there will be a new major group of gamers playing other games: those that didn't like the new edition. And yes, many will keep playing 3.5. But there numbers will gradually dwindle.
But it is rather annoying that I keep hearing people say, "Everyone is going to convert to 4E eventually." No. 4E does not have mind control powers and there are more fish in the sea then just the 4E fish, thank you very much.
but I don't think people who will stop buying from Paizo because the company switches to 4th edition are doing anything wrong. They're making the decision that is right for them with their money.Again, QFT. Paizo is an excellent company and they put out a superb product. I started my Dungeon Subscription because I wanted to learn from the masters as to what quality adventures looked like. Well, 3.5 is going away now and and no one knows if that market will dry up or not. Paizo is going to make a decision on which way to go because it is right for them and their employees. People should decide if they are going to continue to...
I can only speak for myself, but I've never claimed *everyone* is going to switch, or even that any particular person is going to switch. Rather, the majority of people engaging in the "I'll never switch" rhetoric will, in fact, switch eventually. Like crosswiredmind, I've been down this road many times before, heard all the same bluster, etc. People got annoyed then too. Today I play and discuss 3.5 with most of those same people.
Somehow, people keep hearing "you're lying, you'll switch." despite the fact I haven"t said that. YOU may never switch...some people undoubtedly will not, but (1) it will be far fewer than the number now saying they will "never switch," and (2) it will be a marginal (and eventually insignificant) number.
I'd hate to see Paizo make a bad decision based on flawed data, so I speak up. I think that this is an opinion is fairly clear, and I recognize you may not agree. I respect your right to have a different opinion. Having a different opinion doesn't make you stupid, or a bad person, or worthy of contempt. It just makes you mistaken.
|
If you saw Book of 9 Swords and didn't like it, are you more or less likely to play 4E?
I bought Book of 9 Swords, because it sounded like something I'd really enjoy. A new system for fighters, enabling the cinematic flavour of crouching tiger/hidden dragon? I love Oriental adventures, I loved Diablo II, and Bo9S had all of these aspects, but failed in it's implementation. I wanted to like this product *so* much, but it just didn't work for me. It took D&D too far too quickly in the wrong direction. The rules were just too different to gel with the current edition.
I suspect Bo9S sold very well, because it promised so much, but that few people actually use it.
If 4E makes heavy use of concepts from Bo9S, then I really don't know what to make of it? :-(
Does the fact that I don't really much care one way or another about the editions make me contemptable or enviable? Or crazy/stupid?:D
Nope.
None of the above.
Nope.None of the above.
Small mercies. :) Hey! Good morning Kruelaid!
Does the fact that I don't really much care one way or another about the editions make me contemptable or enviable? Or crazy/stupid?
:D
Maybe it means you realise there are more important things in life to worry about?
Greg
I'm pretty much determined to stick to 3e.
If Paizo chooses to convert, that might make me look at 4e again, but even then, it's likely that I won't buy anything 4e.
If that happens, I will very likely cancel my Pathfinder Subscription, since I won't have any use for 4e adventures (I'd have to convert them all myself, and then I can as well make my own).
Chronicles might follow, depending on whether I keep playing in Golarion, or how much crunch is in there.
If I cancel both, I might actually cancel the Planet Stories subscription, too, but not out of hatred: Right now, I get those books together with my Pathfinder/Chronicles shipments, at no additional shipping cost. If I had to pay shipping for each book, It would probably mean that the price (even with the 20% off) is higher than what I'd pay in a local bookstore or amazon.de. Since there is no extra benefit for the subscription, I'd cancel (but continue buying the books).
Now, the more I see of 4e, the more I think Paizo will not change. It looks too restrictive in too many places.
I absolutely hate the fact that some people (at least three so far) have said that most of the people who said they won't switch to 4th edition really will in 1-2 years.It happened with the switch to AD&D, 2E, and 3E (and 3.5). It happened with MegaTraveller. It happened with the switch between RunQuest 2 and 3. It happened when Star Wars went from West End to WotC.
I have seen this pattern so many times I feel no need to qualify my statement. I have been a gamer far too long to be duped by the "I won't switch! You can't make me!" bluster.
I still play WEG Star Wars and have no interest in d20 Star Wars, still play original Deadlands rather than Savage World Deadlands, and still play Pendragon 4th edition even though 5th edition is out.
I guess I'm just odd that way. A new edition needs to be a vast improvement over the last edition for me to get on board. A shiny new cover and some cool new rules aren't gonna do it in and of themselves.
I absolutely hate the fact that some people (at least three so far) have said that most of the people who said they won't switch to 4th edition really will in 1-2 years.It happened with the switch to AD&D, 2E, and 3E (and 3.5). It happened with MegaTraveller. It happened with the switch between RunQuest 2 and 3. It happened when Star Wars went from West End to WotC.
I have seen this pattern so many times I feel no need to qualify my statement. I have been a gamer far too long to be duped by the "I won't switch! You can't make me!" bluster.
I have no idea how long Crosswiredmind has been a gamer, but in the 30+ yrs I've played D&D in its various incarnations I didn't feel (or really see) the "I won't switch bluster" between other editions. Some folk were irked about 3.5 being so close on the heels of 3.0, but in 2000 when 3rd came on the scene the players really seemed ready for an updated game. AD&D was a tired worn thing by then. My long term group welcomed it-there was no bluster. 3rd was credited with bringing lapsed gamers back-the primary reason was that the changes were mechanical. 3/3.5 honored the 25+ yr history of the game. It built on lore people remembered and 4E won't. I hope that 4E is either so clearly better that it wins over the bulk of the people or so terrible that it fails. To fracture the player base into two because 4E is only average will be bad for WOTC and likely the hobby as a whole.
I absolutely hate the fact that some people (at least three so far) have said that most of the people who said they won't switch to 4th edition really will in 1-2 years.It happened with the switch to AD&D, 2E, and 3E (and 3.5). It happened with MegaTraveller. It happened with the switch between RunQuest 2 and 3. It happened when Star Wars went from West End to WotC.
I have seen this pattern so many times I feel no need to qualify my statement. I have been a gamer far too long to be duped by the "I won't switch! You can't make me!" bluster.
I have no idea how long Crosswiredmind has been a gamer, but in the 30+ yrs I've played D&D in its various incarnations I didn't feel (or really see) the "I won't switch bluster" between other editions. Some folk were irked about 3.5 being so close on the heels of 3.0, but when in 2000 when 3rd came on the scene the players really seemed ready for an updated game. AD&D was a tired worn thing by then. My long term group welcomed it-there was no bluster. 3rd was credited with bringing lapsed gamers back-the primary reason was that the changes were mechanical. 3/3.5 honored the 25+ yr history of the game. It built on lore people remembered and 4E won't. I hope that 4E is either so clearly better that it wins over the bulk of the people or so terrible that it fails. To fracture the player base into two because 4E is only average will be bad for WOTC and likely the hobby as a whole.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I absolutely hate the fact that some people (at least three so far) have said that most of the people who said they won't switch to 4th edition really will in 1-2 years.It happened with the switch to AD&D, 2E, and 3E (and 3.5). It happened with MegaTraveller. It happened with the switch between RunQuest 2 and 3. It happened when Star Wars went from West End to WotC.
I have seen this pattern so many times I feel no need to qualify my statement. I have been a gamer far too long to be duped by the "I won't switch! You can't make me!" bluster.
When 2E came out, I was already gaming less than I used to. I considered getting back into the game more regularly but the cost to upgrade to a new edition to find out if I really still enjoyed this game and would enjoy it with a new group seemed burdensome. So I didn't.
I stopped playing for more than ten years.
I think CWM is right in that the gamers who are regularly and actively complaining about the new edition probably play enough to make it worthwhile. Other less active gamers will not bother though.
|
I have no idea how long Crosswiredmind has been a gamer, but in the 30+ yrs I've played D&D in its various incarnations I didn't feel (or really see) the "I won't switch bluster" between other editions. Some folk were irked about 3.5 being so close on the heels of 3.0, but in 2000 when 3rd came on the scene the players really seemed ready for an updated game. AD&D was a tired worn thing by then. My long term group welcomed it-there was no bluster. 3rd was credited with bringing lapsed gamers back-the primary reason was that the changes were mechanical.
Testify, brother! Testify! Tell it like it is!
All the features we are constantly being told we are crying out to be changed or dropped (monsters using same rules as PCs, grappling, attacks of opportunity, multiple bonus types, new-style 'Damage Reduction' instead of flat immunity, ad nauseum) were the very features that sold my group on Third Edition.What's the opposite of 'a rose-tinted view of the past'? Trying to concoct the myth of a division that never existed is extremely tiresome, and I wish it would stop.
I still have the gaming magazines from 1999/2000, with their cautiously positive letters pages, and I still game with several of the same people from that time, with the exact same experiences.
Hence, trying to implant false memories in me is doomed to fail.
I was never abducted by aliens, I was not a witch in a former life, I was not abused by a Satanic cult, and I never swore I would never switch to 3rd Edition.
Testify, brother! Testify!
Snorter! Get the table![/bad humor attempt]
Testify, brother! Testify!Snorter! Get the table![/bad humor attempt]
I did switch to 3.0, and at first, I did hate it.
However, the standardization turned out to be, over the long haul, an excellent choice.
The problem is, they're removing it! The standardization is what makes the game WORK.
I think a lot will look at Mongoose Traveller next month. How much play they'll get is another question.
Well, Mongoose Traveller doesn't apply since there aren't hordes of people shouting at the top of their lungs that they won't convert. They are however hordes of people saying they like what they see from the Open Playtest, and other hordes of people saying, they'll wait to see what their favorite traveller licencee will do after their existing licence runs out. Some companies are looking elsewhere for their system. Others are looking to Mongoose's and what they can do with it.
I suspect Bo9S sold very well, because it promised so much, but that few people actually use it.
A player used it in a game that I play in. The DM forbid the book for the next game. The classes are just so broken compared to everything else.
If 4E makes heavy use of concepts from Bo9S
It does.
I'd hate to see Paizo make a bad decision based on flawed data, so I speak up. I think that this is an opinion is fairly clear, and I recognize you may not agree. I respect your right to have a different opinion. Having a different opinion doesn't make you stupid, or a bad person, or worthy of contempt. It just makes you mistaken.
The OGL is the true X factor in this game. Troll Lord Games appears to be doing fine with Castles & Crusades, enough that Goodman makes adventures for them. Some companies are looking into OSRIC games. But the real difference this time around is that any company can continue producing products for 3.5 without years of interruption (and letting the fan base dwindle away). That has never happened before with any other system. As such, no one (not you, not me, not Paizo, not even Wizards) knows exactly how that X factor will interact with the new edition. It certainly won't help, but how much it will hurt is completely unknown.
If TLG came out with C&C right after 3.0's launch and promised to keep making 2E AD&D compatable products, would that have made 3.0 less of a success, possibly. Alot more people were disgruntled with 2E back when 3.0 came out then are disgruntled with 3.5.
T4 was largely ignored because the game sucked. T5 is expected to be largely ignored as well considering that what is known about it sounds like it will have an even larger suckage factor then T4 did. Plenty of other games that had a large fan following got ignored becuase of a high suckage factor. 4E doesn't sound like anything that resembles what I expect when I play D&D. That constitutes a high suckage factor to me, and I know it does the same to others.
So frankly, I see those saying, "The large majority of people are going to be playing 4E in a couple of years," (yes, I went and looked in the gut check thread and was not able to find anyone saying that everyone will convert, but I found a few saying something similar to this statement) as not looking at all the data. I see you as willing choosing to ignore certain sections of gamer history to arrive a predetermined conclusion that you like. It is quite possible that 4E will be a complete and total flop. It is also possible that 4E may sell better then even WotC is expecting. We just don't know.
So frankly, I see those saying, "The large majority of people are going to be playing 4E in a couple of years," (yes, I went and looked in the gut check thread and was not able to find anyone saying that everyone will convert, but I found a few saying something similar to this statement) as not looking at all the data. I see you as willing choosing to ignore certain sections of gamer history to arrive a predetermined conclusion that you like. It is quite possible that 4E will be a complete and total flop. It is also possible that 4E may sell better then even WotC is expecting. We just don't know.
I agree; we don't know. But we can agree the outcomes are mutually exclusive. Either the majority of current 3.5 players will eventually switch, or they won't. In the context of uncertainty, I tend to look for historical parallels. While such parallels will never be a perfect match, I believe certain common behavior patterns emerge, and those patterns are intepreted by me as evidence the most will swithc.
I'm not calling anyone a liar...hence my use of the term "mistaken."
In the context of uncertainty, I tend to look for historical parallels. While such parallels will never be a perfect match, I believe certain common behavior patterns emerge, and those patterns are intepreted by me as evidence the most will swithc.
That is as good a theory as any... But it has it's own flaws.
If you go to a fast food place, pay 10 bucks for food that makes you ill... You might go back a second, or even third time - even if the food still makes you ill. But predicting that you will go back a fourth time isn't very smart.
No, I am not saying D&D makes people ill. But the feeling of "tossing" money to it each time might be similar.
So, if you are looking for predictability, I would say that the group that started in later editions is more likely to switch over, but those that started earlier probably aren't.
But we can agree the outcomes are mutually exclusive. Either the majority of current 3.5 players will eventually switch, or they won't.
To be honest, I am willing to conceed the possibility that the majority will convert and the game will still flop. Paizo is looking long and hard about the possibility of their customer base being split 50/50. Imagine if the same happened to WotC. Say for the sake of argument that 55% switch and they fail to attract any sizable amount of new players. That would mean that a majority did infact switch over, but is 55% of their current customer base enough for them to keep making D&D? Somehow, I don't think so.
I also see the X factor of the OGL making all parallels go right out the window.
|
|
I have no idea how long Crosswiredmind has been a gamer, but ...He's old. CWM is old. I'm old too. So are you. We're all old.
Yep - just shoveled snow and my back hurts. Welcome to 40 - that is what the pain is telling me.
BTW - I just pulled out my battered copy of Dungeon. I apparently bought it in 1975 since a receipt that I scribbled on was still in it. I started with D&D the very next year.
So I have been a gamer for 33 of my 40 years - for 5 of those I worked at my FLGS.
I have no idea how long Crosswiredmind has been a gamer, but ...He's old. CWM is old. I'm old too. So are you. We're all old.Yep - just shoveled snow and my back hurts. Welcome to 40 - that is what the pain is telling me.
BTW - I just pulled out my battered copy of Dungeon. I apparently bought it in 1975 since a receipt that I scribbled on was still in it. I started with D&D the very next year.
So I have been a gamer for 33 of my 40 years - for 5 of those I worked at my FLGS.
Wow. 34 of 40 years here. Hey, brudda. :) Playing proto-D&D at such a young age puts us in a very small group.
I also see the X factor of the OGL making all parallels go right out the window.
Indeed, as a DM I am going to dictate which version or game system I will use. With the OGL, for new players who don't have those rules, and can't purchase them due to WotC not publishing them anymore, I can now go to Kinkos or Office Depot or whatever and get a copy of the SRD printed for my new players. In effect, I the individual now control production of the core rules. Are they 100% complete? No, but they are complete enough with the texts, I the DM, already own.
|
|
Wow. 34 of 40 years here. Hey, brudda. :) Playing proto-D&D at such a young age puts us in a very small group.
Yep. I was lucky. My brother is 7 years older than me. The shopping center near our house had this new store open in 1975 - Strategy and Fantasy World (now the Compleat Strategist).
My allowance was just enough for a pack of minis.
I would walk there almost every day to drool over new games and bug my brother.
I still have the mini from my first real character - Black Cloak the Wizard. Real creative name since my brother painted the guy black. He made it to 5th level before the Temple of the Frog did him in.
Gawd I am old.
I have minis from back then that looked repellantly homemade. Painting only made them look worse. When Ral Partha and Grenadier came along it was a rennaissance.
|
What's the opposite of 'a rose-tinted view of the past'? Trying to concoct the myth of a division that never existed is extremely tiresome, and I wish it would stop.
I still have the gaming magazines from 1999/2000, with their cautiously positive letters pages, and I still game with several of the same people from that time, with the exact same experiences.
Hence, trying to implant false memories in me is doomed to fail.
I was never abducted by aliens, I was not a witch in a former life, I was not abused by a Satanic cult, and I never swore I would never switch to 3rd Edition.
I just rifled through some back issues as well. The letter column had stuff like, 'Of the 10 new rules previewed, one I didn't have a strong opinion about (the inititiave system), and the other nine I loved. In fact, I've already been using six of them as house rules!'
Wow. Were we ever so vitriolic and hysterical with our hands-wringing prophecies of DOOOOMMMM!
But I guess it's so much easier to utterly scoff at any concerns we have about some of the sweeping changes in 4E (such as the massive, and arguably unnecessary, changes being made to the Realms setting) by making up ridiculous straw men versions of our arguments and calling us all irrational WATBs.
To be honest, I am willing to conceed the possibility that the majority will convert and the game will still flop. Paizo is looking long and hard about the possibility of their customer base being split 50/50. Imagine if the same happened to WotC. Say for the sake of argument that 55% switch and they fail to attract any sizable amount of new players. That would mean that a majority did infact switch over, but is 55% of their current customer base enough for them to keep making D&D? Somehow, I don't think so.
They really, really have to hit some advertising on this new edition. They are *counting* on new blood entering the market because of 4E, and I'm not exactly seeing a media blitz at my local gaming store, or on the television, or on the internet, for that matter.
If 95% percent of 3.X players make the switch, they've still spent a crapload of time and money working on 4E and *LOST.* Breaking even isn't good enough. They have to *grow* the base, or they've been flushing money down the toilet with this new edition.
I also see the X factor of the OGL making all parallels go right out the window.
True that. We did have a Creature Collection from Sword & Sorcery hit the shelves *before* the Monster Manual, after all.
My allowance was just enough for a pack of minis.
I would walk there almost every day to drool over new games and bug my brother.
Gawd I am old.
I too well recall riding my bike 9 miles to the CS in Montclair NJ to spend my allowance in 1977....good times. I have so much more of everything now, but that level of passion eludes me now at 43.
I'm really puzzled by WOTCs marketing. I'm affluent enough to buy whatever I want (within reason) and everyone knows that 'old' people have the cash. The target audience doesn't seem to have the income that older folk have, they'll need to choose between food, beer or gaming-I'm betting beer wins. Me I can afford all three :)
|
|
I absolutely hate the fact that some people have said that most of the people who said they won't switch to 4th edition really will in 1-2 yearsI have seen this pattern so many times I feel no need to qualify my statement.
and this is why your opinion matter so little...
i deleted my original post because it was too insulting (with words like smarmy, hubris, small-minded, etc...) and instead, i will try to explain the problem with this thought process.
All the evidence you use to dismiss people's statements about refusing to play 4ed is anecdotal. You have no actual objective, statistical evidence. In addition, you actually seem to believe that your personal opinion about what OTHERS will do is more accurate than their own assessment of their probable actions. If you were to state that you think most people will switch even if the person you are responding to will not, that would be a valid opinion. But as it stands,
To recap your position:
1- People who say they won't play 4ed don't really know what they want.
2- You know better than me what I want.
3- Therefore, contrary to every personal inclination and reasoned position on why 4ed = teh suxor, I will be playing it the week of release.
4- ???
5- Profit.
It didn't happen for TNE to T4. It didn't happen in droves from RQ3 to MRQ. And I personally never played a game of d20 starwars in my life and I never will. My WEG d6 star wars does me just fine, thank you.It happened with the switch to AD&D, 2E, and 3E (and 3.5). It happened with MegaTraveller. It happened with the switch between RunQuest 2 and 3. It happened when Star Wars went from West End to WotC.
I have seen this pattern so many times I feel no need to qualify my statement. I have been a gamer far too long to be duped by the "I won't switch! You can't make me!" bluster.
QFT. It also happened with the switch from HERO 4th to Fusion. The company owned by DoJ at the time thought to drastically change the game and it failed miserably. Even now HERO games fans really dislike that system.
And yeah, If I say I'm not switching? I'm pretty much not switching. I plan on strip mining elements from 4E for my 3.5 games, but as far as supporting 4E as I did with 3E? That's not happening, but thanks for calling me and so many others liars though.
|
|
QFT. It also happened with the switch from HERO 4th to Fusion. The company owned by DoJ at the time thought to drastically change the game and it failed miserably. Even now HERO games fans really dislike that system.
And yeah, If I say I'm not switching? I'm pretty much not switching. I plan on strip mining elements from 4E for my 3.5 games, but as far as supporting 4E as I did with 3E? That's not happening, but thanks for calling me and so many others liars though.
I resisted the switch from Mutants & Mastermind 1E to 2E. Turns out 2E was a great improvement, and it just took me some time to 'grok' it.
I was intrigued by the World of Darkness switch (and I liked the original switch from 1E to 2E/Revised). It stank on ice. We don't play that anymore, and the three books I bought before realizing that are now in boxes.
I was intrigued by the GURPS 3E to 4E switch (and upgraded seamlessly from Man-to-Man to 1st Ed to 2nd Ed to 3rd Ed). Half of 4E was house rules we already used (no PD!), the other half was *way* mathier than we were comfortable with. The 4E books I did buy are now in the box with the 'new' World of Darkness books.
Some of the enthusiasts take great glee in calling us liars or hypocrites or grognards or haters or whatever other vitriol spews from their pie-holes, but if it's a better system, I'll buy into it, regardless of what I think of the presentation thus far, and I won't feel at all like a hypocrite for questioning the dregs I've seen so far. At the moment, it doesn't look nearly as robust as 3rd edition, and I don't think I'll upgrade. I definitely won't buy in during the first months, as I was burned by the whole PHB reprinting-with-new-rules during the 3rd edition launch, and I'm no longer a fan of the George Lucas style of releases, with new 'directors cuts' every three months.
The name-callers can stew. I may or may not be playing 4E a year from now. At the moment, I'm leaning against it. Other people, bragging about selling all of their 3E stuff and that they'll never play it again, are calling *me* irrational.
I just laugh. I still get some use out of the charts in my *1st Edition* DMG. Never know when I'm gonna need a list of herbs, or noble titles, or different words for purple. (WTF was up with that? Seriously, did Gygax had a purple fetish?)
Purple was/is a color of royalty - synonyms for it could be useful. :D
I see you are being as tactful as always CWM.
Personally, I love the game and play for the game, not the system. Whatever the group wants to play, we'll play, and I reckon we will decide democratically. If it's a bunch of grognards I can see us pulling out 3.5 for another decade and maybe more depending on where WotC takes the system. If it's some of my students over here and we want something simpler, maybe it'll be 4E.
The game, too many people forgetting the game.
|
|
I see you are being as tactful as always CWM.
Personally, I love the game and play for the game, not the system. Whatever the group wants to play, we'll play, and I reckon we will decide democratically. If it's a bunch of grognards I can see us pulling out 3.5 for another decade and maybe more depending on where WotC takes the system. If it's some of my students over here and we want something simpler, maybe it'll be 4E.
The game, too many people forgetting the game.
Tact is overrated ;-)
I agree that it is about the game. That's one of the reasons I can't fathom the quasi-religious zealotry behind this devotion to 3.5 and a hate for 4E when people haven't even played the flipping game.
I may end up disliking 4E as much as I disliked 2E and I may spend next 18 years playing other games like I did before 3E came along.
Unless WotC has truly gone insane and is about to crap out a truly awful game then D&D will still be the big magnet at the center of the game industry.
I agree that it is about the game. That's one of the reasons I can't fathom the quasi-religious zealotry behind this devotion to 3.5 and a hate for 4E when people haven't even played the flipping game.
It's because they love the game so much, and feel so cheated and lied to. Their anger is righteous: they have lost their favorite magazine, the system (and it's a pretty good one) that they have invested is being abandoned, and WotC looks likes it's burning the bridges.
Arguing isn't going to change them, it just brings their anger out more. Perhaps that's good in that they are getting it off their shoulders, and perhaps that's bad in that it makes them more resistant.
Tact is overrated ;-)
I tell that to my boss all the time, but she keeps telling me that when you are tactless to real dollar paying customers (as opposed to internal company customers), it does not pay. lol
I agree that it is about the game. That's one of the reasons I can't fathom the quasi-religious zealotry behind this devotion to 3.5 and a hate for 4E when people haven't even played the flipping game.
While the above statment may be true for some, in my mind and my six playerss minds it is not true. None of us want to learn another system, and none of us want to spend more money on all the new books and "complete" type books, and we do own collectively quite a lot of both WotC and 3rd party d20 (3.5E) books. Also I have enough 3.5E adventures (paths/campaigns/etc.) to last 15 years or so without having to buy anything. And if you add in Pathfinder AP2, and maybe AP3 and that adds 2 more years for each one, for a total of 19 years.
So in my mind, if Paizo switches to 4E, I will stop all subscriptions and buy a GM module or two a year (Logue's stuff & the announced Christine Schneider one), but that is a financial and preference decision, and not some zealotry.
-- david
Papa-DRB
Grognard
My better half and me
I just laugh. I still get some use out of the charts in my *1st Edition* DMG. Never know when I'm gonna need a list of herbs, or noble titles, or different words for purple. (WTF was up with that? Seriously, did Gygax had a purple fetish?)
Oh. I need that PDF. I like lists of obscure words. (My Verbal GRE score was largely thanks to WotC.)