Did I see someone offering odds on the smurfy clash between the Chelaxian with the red herring and the Qadiran with an ancestral sword?
as the drunk man here i will say eh whatever they either dig it or ya find it a bad PR moev carry on
as the drunk man here i will say eh whatever they either dig it or ya find it a bad PR moev carry on
Uh, this is currently a compulsory smurf zone. You did not say smurf.
ugh smurf.... i nedd more wild turkey
how sad is it at 1 am i surf the boreds drunk.;.oh smurf
are ther non blue smurfs? i want a green one mayhp like orange or all purply
I love the artist. Used to watch all his videos on newgrounds.com
This video, though, is awful. Sound sucks, animation is choppy. Content is boring.
Wizards lost most of it's fans, anyhow.
I agree with this whole-heartedly. It's going to take more than a series of "no it isn't" statements to make me drop the hypothesis that 4E is nothing more than table-top video-gaming.
The video game criticism IS valid. The monster manual reads like a list of stats you'd see in a video game guide: next to no flavor, with just a wall of numbers.
I don't suppose pointing out that there is no such thing as table top video gaming would change your opinion.
The 3.5 monsters had statblocks it's true, but they weren't <i>just</i> stat blocks. But in my opinion, with out a frame of referance, the monster is just something to kill, not a real thinking adversary.
Pretty much it was just stat blocks. I mean if we are looking for something that adds depth to the monsters then 3.x and 4E both have utter crap for monster manuals.
A good monster manual, presuming that significantly more then stat blocks are desired, would be 2nd editions monster manuals with their detailed descriptions of the monsters as well as a habitat/society section and an ecology section.
After that we are just splitting hairs on which crap is more odorous and repulsive.
Reality is WotC essentially got out of the detailed monster back ground business when they took over. If we want backgrounds for our monsters we can either go and look them up in 2nd edition, we can make up our own backgrounds, or we can look to a third party publisher for a more detailed and in depth view of the monsters.
|
The 3.5 monsters had statblocks it's true, but they weren't <i>just</i> stat blocks. But in my opinion, with out a frame of referance, the monster is just something to kill, not a real thinking adversary.Pretty much it was just stat blocks. I mean if we are looking for something that adds depth to the monsters then 3.x and 4E both have utter crap for monster manuals.
A good monster manual, presuming that significantly more then stat blocks are desired, would be 2nd editions monster manuals with their detailed descriptions of the monsters as well as a habitat/society section and an ecology section.
After that we are just splitting hairs on which crap is more odorous and repulsive.
Reality is WotC essentially got out of the detailed monster back ground business when they took over. If we want backgrounds for our monsters we can either go and look them up in 2nd edition, we can make up our own backgrounds, or we can look to a third party publisher for a more detailed and in depth view of the monsters.
2nd edition MM was da bomb. I still enjoy reading that book and its add ons, god the 3.5 & 4E MM's are a bore.
Do you remember the Monstrous Arcana series? That was some nice monster detail.
|
You claim to love WotC and 4E. Do you think you're doing them any favors by making yourself (and those boards) a punchline?
Objectivity FAIL, indeed. It's remarks like those that make some feel like 4E is more of a game for......well, people who would use 'Objectivity FAIL' in a post.
I Personally couldn't care less what a bunch of people on another board think of me or my opinion, just like I couldn't care less if someone on the street hears me talk about gaming and thinks 'Oh god, a D&D playing geek!'. The group I am a part of is Paizo. I feel that my group is the best or I wouldn't be a part of it. All other groups are teeth-gnashing nerd-ragers who play sub-par games IMO, so I don't concern myself with them.Yes, I'm the sort of person who would use "Objectivity fail" in a post. I'm glad my sense of humor supports your (clearly unwarranted) sense of superiority. I will now respond with all the wit and intellectual vigor someone "like you" deserves: Bite me.
Quit freaking whinning about 4E. GET OVER IT. That is all: The rest is obfuscation.
I don't see anywhere in my post that can be taken as 'whining'(yes, it only has one 'n'), and I am over it. So much so that I feel no need to go to WOTC boards and show one iota of concern for the games and products represented there. You, however, should practice what you preach. Get over it. Go back to the 'other' boards and practice your own brand of superiority complex, hypocrite. We shall all weep here for the insults and maligning that are tossed our way by those we choose not to conform with.
will throw in on the 2e MM love here great books for world building That was one thing i disliked about 3e was lack of monster info and 4e is even worse. Am very glad paizo seems to get the need for fluff in the MM
I don't see anywhere in my post that can be taken as 'whining'(yes, it only has one 'n'), and I am over it. So much so that I feel no need to go to WOTC boards and show one iota of concern for the games and products represented there. You, however, should practice what you preach. Get over it. Go back to the 'other' boards and practice your own brand of superiority complex, hypocrite. We shall all weep here for the insults and maligning that are tossed our way by those we choose not to conform with.
You claim to love WotC and 4E. Do you think you're doing them any favors by making yourself (and those boards) a punchline?
Objectivity FAIL, indeed. It's remarks like those that make some feel like 4E is more of a game for......well, people who would use 'Objectivity FAIL' in a post.
I Personally couldn't care less what a bunch of people on another board think of me or my opinion, just like I couldn't care less if someone on the street hears me talk about gaming and thinks 'Oh god, a D&D playing geek!'. The group I am a part of is Paizo. I feel that my group is the best or I wouldn't be a part of it. All other groups are teeth-gnashing nerd-ragers who play sub-par games IMO, so I don't concern myself with them.Yes, I'm the sort of person who would use "Objectivity fail" in a post. I'm glad my sense of humor supports your (clearly unwarranted) sense of superiority. I will now respond with all the wit and intellectual vigor someone "like you" deserves: Bite me.
Quit freaking whinning about 4E. GET OVER IT. That is all: The rest is obfuscation.
Since we're playing retarded English police:
" We shall all weep here for the insults and maligning that are tossed our way by those we choose not to conform with."
Ending a sentence with a preposition is an error. Oops.
"Go back to the 'other' boards and practice your own brand of superiority complex, hypocrite."
The word "own" in the above sentence is extraneous. Oops.
Dare I say it? Grammar police FAIL. Self importance WIN!
Here's a little tip for you dude: Stop trying to prove you're smarter than me. Better men than you have tried and failed. And then there's the fact that it has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which most of the people you're trying to impress will have noticed by now.
I was told there would be no Grammar police.
|
|
Dare I say it? Grammar police FAIL. Self importance WIN!
Here's a little tip for you dude: Stop trying to prove you're smarter than me. Better men than you have tried and failed. And then there's the fact that it has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which most of the people you're trying to impress will have noticed by now.
You sure do sound smart. All I need to do is keep you talking to prove how intelligent you are. Now respond back and help me prove my case more.
I was told there would be no Grammar police.Woot 2 things against Forum Etiquette in one Pic!!!
That pic was funny as hell.
You sure do sound smart. All I need to do is keep you talking to prove how intelligent you are. Now respond back and help me prove my case more.Dare I say it? Grammar police FAIL. Self importance WIN!
Here's a little tip for you dude: Stop trying to prove you're smarter than me. Better men than you have tried and failed. And then there's the fact that it has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which most of the people you're trying to impress will have noticed by now.
"respond back" is redundant. Hope that helps. :D
P.S. I'm willing to keep "replying back" as long as you feel it is helpful. I'm just a giving kind of guy.
Can we throw pies next? oh oh or rocks, maybe beer I would so be in on beer throwing
|
If you think that:a) Wizards doesn't deserve to try and make money
b) The video game criticism is valid
c) 4th Edition is over-simplifiedYou really need to take a step back and re-examine your position. None of these things are true, and Wizards was only making fun of the people who decide to whine about those things incessantly online instead of being mature about it and enjoying whichever game they'd like.
These things are not true IN YOUR OPINION. In my opinion, b and c are very true (a isn't, everyone has a right to TRY and make money). I'm sorry to tell you this, but my opinion is just as valid as yours. If you don't have a problem with 4e and it's mechanics, I'm glad for you. Everyone should have a game they enjoy, and I'm happy when anyone is able to find one. 4e, however, doesn't do it for me. I really do think it's over simplified, and I really do think it plays a hell of a lot like WoW (another game I play a lot). It's not the style of game I'm interested in, so I'm sticking with 3.5. That's my opinion, and it is absolutely true... for me.
Second point, it's inappropriate for a so-called professional company to spend time belittling any portion of their potential customer base. It's not professional, and it's counter-productive also. While I'm not offended by anything they say at this time, that's only because I decided months ago that WotC doesn't care what I think, and I don't care what WotC thinks. Frankly, they can go to hell in the handbasket of their choice for all I care, I won't notice them one way or another.
I can say that if I had an employee even suggest making a video, even one obviously tongue in cheek like this one, that presented my company like this, I would have to examine that employee's place in my company. That kind of bad judgment is a problem. And no, I'm not stating something hypothetical, I really have fired subordinates for that level of bad judgment.
|
|
'I, Tyrant' the one about beholders was the only one of the Monstrous arcana series I got, but it was brilliant; especially the look at what was going on in the mind of the average beholder... :D
Edit:
And on the subject of monsters, and 2nd Edition AD&D, the Van Richten's Guides series were top of the range too; I have a couple of the individual guides, and all three of the compendiums.
I think I have all the Van Richten books and the guides (would have to check) and I honestly think that (mechanics aside) AD&D (1E & 2E mostly) was hands down the best fluff produced for D&D. Even now reading them just gives me endless ideas.
This is hands down the absolute worst treatment of (formerly) loyal customers by any company I have ever seen.
Really, the ones that this video makes fun of aren't really deserving of shining treatment...
Wow. Let's hold that thought for a moment...
They've basically decided to spend their free time pointlessly trolling a message board owned by a company who wished them no ill will. We make fun of those trolls all the time. I don't see why Wizards has to censor themselves either.
It's called professionalism. Or would be, if they exhibited such a trait here.
Did anyone get the message that gamers with contrary opinions are worth s~%%ting on?
No. Just the ones who act like ten year-old trolls.
And you.
Really, the ones that this video makes fun of aren't really deserving of shining treatment...
Seriously, your slavish approval of everything WotC does and your obsessive hostility toward their critics has become a bit absurd. You are as guilty of fueling these flame wars as anyone. Why is your brand of hostility so much better than that of others?
Hey I heard there was a Smurf convention around here! I brought the Smurfberries! Anyone?
Looks around at the burning wreckage
Oh ..um... never mind .. Scurries away
Hey I heard there was a Smurf convention around here! I brought the Smurfberries! Anyone?
Looks around at the burning wreckage
Oh ..um... never mind .. Scurries away
Time to send for the fire-brigade....
Yum. $mur[/b]fs. Poodles love $mur[b]fs.
**licks chops**
Kneel before the Dread Lord blue appetizer!
Traveller Smurf draws his +5 Poodlebane sword
Bring it Fluffy!
'I, Tyrant' the one about beholders was the only one of the Monstrous arcana series I got, but it was brilliant; especially the look at what was going on in the mind of the average beholder... :D
Ooh. Bonus points. I really liked I, Tyrant as well and I completely agree that the idea that Beholders were subconsciously repressing all thoughts of failure and erasing from their conscious mind all events in which they failed was truly brilliant.
I still read I, Tyrant when I want to use Beholders. Beyond this I felt that the 3.x splat books on monster types was very hit or miss but Lords of Madness was excellent, IMO.
|
|
Yes, there is. It's called 4E D&D. ;)
I don't suppose pointing out that there is no such thing as table top video gaming would change your opinion.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
*Smurf, smurf, smurf, blort!*
*Smurf, smurf, smurf, blort!*
At last! An HONEST opinion of 4E!
|
|
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!Something vexes thee? :)
Nope. I just have an allergy to ill fitted analogies.
You sure do sound smart. All I need to do is keep you talking to prove how intelligent you are. Now respond back and help me prove my case more.Dare I say it? Grammar police FAIL. Self importance WIN!
Here's a little tip for you dude: Stop trying to prove you're smarter than me. Better men than you have tried and failed. And then there's the fact that it has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which most of the people you're trying to impress will have noticed by now.
"respond back" is redundant. Hope that helps. :D
P.S. I'm willing to keep "replying back" as long as you feel it is helpful. I'm just a giving kind of guy.
I'm no expert but surely "back" is redundant in both of these sentences? To respond you must respond to something and to reply there must be something to reply to. If you read both sentences without the word "Back" I believe they are gramatically correct.
As for the subject of the rest of the thread, Can we not just agree to disagree. Some like 3.5, some like 4E but we all like RPG's. Lets just get on. We are a small enough community as it is without acting like we have been. If we all met in a bar I suspect we would be more civil.
Elcian
Q mutha F'n T
|
|
Nope. I just have an allergy to ill fitted analogies.AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!Something vexes thee? :)
People thinking that 4e is like MMO's is their opinion and can be seen as making sense from their point of view..
So don't go to hard on their opinion. just say I disagree with that opinion and and maybe say why and leave it at that.. ;-)
...
My opinion still stands. 4E is a table-top video game.
I think the real issue 4e fans have Jerry is the rehashing of this term. Now you are entitled to your opinion of "4e=MMO" but does it have to be put on the threads over ...and over ... and over ...
cue the dead horse and the whip!
Don't get me wrong, there is plenty of blame on both sides. When I read "Oh you'll come over to 4e once you get over your little tantrum. You're just being a silly little grognard" in various guises I just want to rip my eyes from their sockets and scream.
The point is, no one is going to be swayed by this endless arguments. Some play Pathfinder. Some play 4e. Some stay with earlier editions. A few even play <cough> Hero. Do we need to snipe at each other? We are all getting supported gaming love, let's just let bygones be bygones.
When TSR came out with 2nd Ed, I thought it had been "dumbed down" and had developed a "plastic" taste. It seemed to have been slanted toward youunger, less sophisticated players. I preferred the more intellectual feel of 1st ed, which was nearly incomprehensible to anyone unversed in the wargaming hobby.
Not sure that I agree at all regarding 2nd edition. For one thing I often find it difficult to really draw significant contrasts between the editions in terms of rules themselves. There are so many similarities that it can be difficult to find the differences. I think comparing 1E and 2E is a lot like comparing 3.0 to 3.5, sure there are differences and one can argue that one version is better then the other but they really don't seem all that different. Its more that the 2nd incarnation is simply a more polished version of the 1st.
That said I think there were very significant differences between the stewardship of 1st and 2nd. 2nd Edition was much more heavily into stories. They released a horror setting, an avant-garde setting, a grim and hostile setting etc. The magazines went from being heavily based on combats, especially in dungeon like surroundings to being about everything that was not combat.
Now they took it all to far and their fan base just seemed to tire of whole thing, after all if you want to do non-combat role playing their are systems out there far better at it then D&D will ever be. WotC recognized that and they instituted a back to the dungeon, back to killing things and taking their stuff, policy.
Fortunately the fan base some good 3PPs came along and moved things more toward balance which is what had really been missing. Killing things without great plot is boring but never killing anything is equally boring, especially in D&D. A good mix is generally what most of the fan base wants - the real tricky part is that their is no consensus on what the ideal mix is... I doubt their will ever be such a consensus as I think its a moving target.