It seems that Necromancer Games might make its own version of D&D. Apparently, Clark does not feel that 4E retains D&D flavor (and I have to say I agree with him, but than again I am not much of a 4E fan):
http://necromancergames.yuku.com/topic/9999/t/1st-Edition-AD-amp-D.html?pag e=7
Hopefully, this means that Necromancer will finally give up on waiting for the GSL and instead concentrate on making other things, such as supporting Pathfinder or its own products.
Okay, I scanned those posts and totally missed Clark saying anything like that.
My bad?
Oh, it's on the next page. Your bad.
;)
From DaveMage, who we all know so well...
I like the faster play of 1E, but not the lack of options present in that system. If I could have 3.5 variety & options with 1E speed, it would be D&D heaven.
And Clark's direct reply:
You may get just that.I have an evil plan in mind.... see a new post coming soon.
Thanks for the scoop, Roman.
Yeah, Clark's posts begin on the second page, but don't stop there - he continues posting on the matter on subsequent pages and later confirms he is working on it. The exact nature of what he is working on is not clear, nor is it clear that it will become an actual product, but still, it sounds interesting.
And will this have any effect on his relationship with Paizo and Pathfinder?
Well, it's been 2 months since WotC announced that a new GSL was coming. This is what happens when Clark gets bored. :)
(I wonder if WotC will get out the revised GSL by year's end.)
I doubt you'll see the "Necromancer 4E" anytime soon (and the GSL probably won't permit it anyway), but the longer WotC delays, the more opportunities Clark will have to come up with things like this.
However, Necromancer will be coming so late to the 4E party that it may indeed be best for them to find their own niche rather than compete with WotC and Goodman, who have already begun saturating the low-level generic 4E adventure market.
And will this have any effect on his relationship with Paizo and Pathfinder?
All depends on the revised GSL.
I don't know, but in one of the later posts, Clark Peterson mentions that he talked about the idea to Erik Mona, so I presume Paizo would be the publisher for whatever Necromancer comes up with. It could be interesting to see what Necromancer comes up with, but I am also hoping for some kind of joint efforts between Paizo and Necromancer so as not to fracture their fanbase further and ensure that D&D-like game support continues.
If Necromancer Games goes 4th edition or if they go Pathfinder they will make one side happy and the other side dissapointed. I think thats a safe assumption.
But correct me if I'm wrong...but if they develop their own system that is neither PRPG or 4E it woould just tick off everybody but a very small minority.
If Necromancer Games goes 4th edition or if they go Pathfinder they will make one side happy and the other side dissapointed. I think thats a safe assumption.
But correct me if I'm wrong...but if they develop their own system that is neither PRPG or 4E it woould just tick off everybody but a very small minority.
Yeah, ever smaller minorities is something to worry about.
I suppose if PFRPG was out in its final version now that would suit Clark fine.
But does he want to start writing for a game system that is changing?
That's gotta be a con.
Well, Pathfinder is far from complete yet - it is possible he could get a deal with Paizo to give input and thus to help shape how Pathfinder will turn out in the end (though hopefully he would not introduce too many 4Eish elements!).
Depending on what kinds of things Necromancer does with its own version of D&D, I might be interested in that too. But I have a feeling, he would base it on 4E more than on 3E, which would probably turn me off - well I guess that would depend on how it was done.
Y'know I was going to ask why Necromancer just doesnt do what Pathfinder does and put out 3.5 product until the fimal PRPG comes out in August.
But then I remember Necro saying it doesnt sell and its not cost effective.
So why can paizo make 3.5 product and be OK and Necromancer games cannot?
I sure know I'd rally behind anythign they put out. Im sure all the Pathfinder fans would to.
So why can paizo make 3.5 product and be OK and Necromancer games cannot?
I don't know - especially since Paizo would be publishing it. I think it has to do with the fact that much of Paizo's sales are subscription-based, while Necromancer's would not be, and they'd be sold through traditional channels (or something along those lines).
The Necro-Paizo relationship made a whole lot more sense before 4e came along. For 3.5 it was, IMO, a perfect fit. Now, it's just odd.
|
Well to clear up a few things.
1) Clark has said this would be a book like Unearthed Arcane for 4e. A host of option rules for the game but not a new game. But one that changes a lot of stuff about the base game if you use all the optional rules.
2) Why can paizo do it and not necro? Publish a 3.5 edition. Name, size, quality, monthly subscription ect. Plus paizo has their fingers in more area's too. Like the online store for example.
Now with what I said above. I am not saying Necro is not well known, but it is not as well known as Paizo. I am not saying Necro makes bad stuff, but they have had a few less than steller books. I have yet to buy a paizo one that is. Just the paizo avg is a bit higher and the production quality (art ect) is higher but once more. When you are bigger with bigger print runs you can afford better.
All the above is just my personal opinion and nothing more. But while i don't claim to have inside info, I do talk to Clark some off the forums and believe what I said above to be true.
Hi everyone.
Not trying to hijack this, but I want to prevent the trainwreck from happening here that is happening at ENWorld and RPGNet.
*We arent making our own version of D&D.
*We arent going to compete with Pathfinder.
*I am not a newly converted 4E "hater."
*I havent "changed my tune" on 4E.
*I still like 4E.
*I play it.
*I want to support it (and I intend to support Pathfinder too).
What I said was this:
*I support the advancment of the game.
*BUT there are some things in 4E that I would like to change that I think could put back in the "soul" of D&D that I think is missing from 4E (your mileage may vary, and I am not trying to preach to you about how you should play D&D, I'm just talking about what I want and what I like).
*I am batting around the idea of doing a Monte-esque 4E rules supplement that would include those changes that I have in mind.
*One of the guys I batted it around with was Mona.
*This is still very embryonic and just me thinking outloud, really.
*It may not ever become anything more than me typing up house rules and putting them in my own binder.
*I pissed people off by using the phrase "anime" in a bad way and that was a mistake.
This all came about because I am a designer and I am bored waiting for the revised GSL :)
So, no, I dont hate 4E. I havent changed my tune. I havent given up on Pathfinder. :)
Save yourself the reading of the many threads on this :)
Clark
Clark,
Not a threadjack, but an appreciated clarification. Perhaps it is a compliment that so many people have an ear to the ground, anxious to know what Orcus is up to?
Fascinating, but I suspect nothing will come out of it.
In any case, while I own every single one of Necro's module products, after their "rah-rah 4e" they've become irrelevant to me (though not yet forgotten) for quite some time. Maybe that'll change... but maybe not.
(Needless to say, though - the flailing attack by the certain usual-suspect 4e cheerleaders over on ENWorld is quite a hoot to watch. Can't... accept... any... perceived... criticism of 4e...!)
Hi everyone.
Not trying to hijack this, but I want to prevent the trainwreck from happening here that is happening at ENWorld and RPGNet.
Hello Clark and thanks for stopping by! It can hardly be a threadjack when the author of a rumored product comes along to qualify things - to the contrary, it is always appreciated.
I must say, though, that luckily this thread did not (and does not) really seem to be developing into a trainwreck, though I don't want to blow it by calling it too soon. ENWorld has really become a much more hostile place since the announcement of 4E percipitated 'edition wars' and indeed I am a much less frequent visotor there because of the vitriol. I used to be a regular poster there until the atmosphere pushed me away. I do still visit, but not as much as before. I don't know about RPGNet, since I have never been a regular poster there.
*We arent making our own version of D&D.
*We arent going to compete with Pathfinder.
*I am not a newly converted 4E "hater."
*I havent "changed my tune" on 4E.
*I still like 4E.
*I play it.
*I want to support it (and I intend to support Pathfinder too).
I am glad to hear that you intend to support Pathfinder. I did not even know that before - I thought you were all gung-ho about 4E. And I certainly did not interpret your posts, as you hating 4E, but you have to admit that the list of things you mentioned that you would like to see changed is not short and some of the changes are a rather fundamental break from 4E assumptions. That does not mean you 'hate' 4E as some on ENWorld seem to interpret it, but it is indicative of the fact that you would prefer quite a lot of things to be different. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, of course, but with some posters you just cannot 'win' if you have even a slightly different opinion.
*I support the advancment of the game.
May I ask only a partially related question? You have stated on numerous occassions, that you "strongly believe in supporting the current edition of D&D". May I ask why is that the case? I mean, yes, you don't hate 4E and like some aspects of 4E, but quite independent of that, why do you believe in "supporting the current edition of D&D" when others might better suit you mechanically/flavor-wise? You are not dependent on D&D for your livelihood, so you can do pretty much whatever you wish with it (well, you don't want to make a loss, but there is less danger of that), so why constrain yourself to supporting an edition that, although you don't hate it, does not really seem to suit your needs very much?
*BUT there are some things in 4E that I would like to change that I think could put back in the "soul" of D&D that I think is missing from 4E (your mileage may vary, and I am not trying to preach to you about how you should play D&D, I'm just talking about what I want and what I like).
I agree with you completely that regardless of its potential merits as a game, the "soul" of D&D is missing from 4E. The change of flavor was fundamental and the mechanics were also hugely transformed. Many people like it that way and don't care whether it feels like D&D or not and many others have a different 'threshold of acceptance' of what is D&D for them, but for some of us this is indeed an issue we have with 4E.
*I am batting around the idea of doing a Monte-esque 4E rules supplement that would include those changes that I have in mind.
From the list of things you said you would prefer to see done differently, I would surmise that there is a rather large number of things you would like to change. In fact, it seems to cross the threshold that it makes me wonder why anchor it to 4E at all?
Consider:
*Insert AD&D flavor into the game
*Return of Vancian magic to some extent
*Introduce actual differences among the classes again - make fighters simpler (albeit still with abilities, though less animesque) and wizards more complex
*Reintroduction of utilitarian abilities
*Make low-level PCs fear Kobolds again (as in make them less 'heroic' at first)
*Increase customization options for characters
And that's listing only some of the things you mentioned. These require a fundamental change of design philosphy from 4E - so why not take 3.X edition as your starting point instead and perhaps insert those parts of 4E that you do like? It would make more sense from my perspective.
This all came about because I am a designer and I am bored waiting for the revised GSL :)
That's another good point speaking in favor of using 3.X edition as your starting point. How do you expect to do what you state will be essentially a supplement for 4E (though it could be more than that) in the absence of acceptable GSL?
My two coppers....
WotC will release some kind of "revised" GSL, which will not ammount to much. It will open up some avenues for creativety but will not release enough freedom to allow a 4e Tome of Horrors. Thats always been Clark's baby, and in my opinion, his most successful. I dont know; I dont see his bottom line.
I dont think; in fact I will predict that the GSL will loosen but it isnt going to allow 4e stats next to 3.5 or Pathfinder stats or allow like products produced; one in 4e, one in 3.5 format. That was the main reason for this. Hasbro knows its main competition would have to be its own 3.5 edition still floating around. After all the OGL D20 trademarked stuff is shredded and/or destroyed and off the PDF shelf, then will the GSL be more flexible.
They were not expecting Pathfider, nor its success.
I think Clark's Monte-Cook-like options book is a great idea for 4e fans who feel kind of shorted on D&D feel. I dont think the GSL will allow it. But then again I am just thinking.....who am I?
I wish tat mean time Clark would support Pathfinder/3.5. I know, I know, it isnt final yet. Let me point out that Paizo is selling 3.5 material...all considered Pathfinder compatable. That was the deal. Backward compatability (as much as possible). I dont want to lose my 3.5 library. I am behind Pathfinder 100% be nice to see some good ole NG material for it...sooner rather than later.
|
|
Ive tried to be optimistic about NG. I was disapointed that Clark wanted to go 4e, but hey thats his choice, he's a smart guy, its his company and vision and only he can really decided whats best for it.
What really bugs me about the whole situation (and probably is driving Clark up the wall!)is the lack of anything being put out in the interm.I understand the reasons behind this, but I just feel like everyone has sort of picked a stance on the issue and has moved on.
Paizo, took a big chance and went their own route (for which I'm very thankful!) Goodman Games is rolling out adventures which seems to target the same audience that NG does. NG was well poised to jump into the 4e pool and make a great splash! They even were lucky enough to get a players suplement from Ari one of the 4e designers, but the lack of making a choice and going for it caused it to be passed off to someone else.
I dont mean to disparage anyone Im just frustrated at a lack of product coming out of NG. I dont believe that a modified GSL will be forthcomming and even if it does I dont think it will make any significant changes. I think the whole point behind the GSL was to really make you choose a side. either stick with the OGL or the GSL but you cant have the best of both worlds.
I would like to see NG stick to what they do best and continue to produce adventures and monster books!
Anyway Im sorry for the rant, but I had to get this off my chest!
Hopefully Clark, everything will soon fall into place for you. Until then happy 4e house rules writing.
Savage Screenmonkey, your frustrations are shared by many. I too think that the GSL is a long way from allowing the kind of support Clark would like. Personally I think the revised GSL is a myth. It served its purpose. Right now the promise of a revised GSL is a tactic to keep any would-be publishers from moving forward on anything else. I am not anti-4e, not anti-WotC, but I am certainly realistic. There is a pattern here. If it smells like a fish and looks like a fish, feels like a fish, there's really no need to kiss the thing. Its a friggin fish!
I am sad to see NG get sucked in. That was one very excellent publisher. The best monster book(ToH)ever turned out came from them. Tegel Manor will never see the light of day again.
Sad day....
Someone else will come fill the gap while Clark waits for his friends at WotC to throw him a bone. I sound harsh, but gee, I hate seeing such a great creative genius produce nothing.......I am thankful Paizo saw this and took the bold move forward.
Just remember the longer it takes for the GSL the more and more likely it is Necro will go PFRPG. Right now they don't have a finished game to support so they are waiting on that, or 4e but they are waiting on the GSL.
True Mistress, but PFRPG is the better bet for what Clark wants to do. Since the advent of 4e (not blaming rules here) several things have happened. WotC is not the same thing nor do they market the same product.
The license is different....completely.
The management and key decision makers sre not the same people.
The product is not the same product.
|
|
I would love nothing more than to see NG go pathfinder.Its not like products that are published before the PF:RPG goes "live" are all of a sudden now obsolete. I can understand for a product like the Slumber Tsar trilogy that you might want to wait, but im sure theirs other stuff that could be produced in the mean time. Like why not a number of small products to bide time for the actual release date.
I also dont understand exactly what it is about the monsters of 4e that cant be emulated/mirrored in a 3.5 way to make Clark happy.Ive never played 4e so maybe this isnt possible but I would imagine that there are certain things about the way monsters work that could be adapted to a 3.5 game.
You are right on target! There is no logical reason why NG cannot go forward. There is so much creative talent there. And you are spot on about the material not suddenly becoming obsolete. I mean; I think most, if not all supporters of Pathfinder RPG are onboard because they did not want 3.5 material on their personal shelves to become obsoleted. It was/is one of the design parameters of James Buhlman and Paizo......to keep the game 3.5 compatable.
I also understand that Clark desires to be part of "current" D&D. I will remind him that the producers of 4e are the self-same drafters of the now "up and coming" once again "to be announced" revised GSL. Pathfinder RPG, though not released until 2009, is "as 3.5 compatable" current. I hope that makes sense. I do however understand his desision to hold off.
If I am not mistaken, the GSL itself, stands in the way of him producing his 4e RPG game options "1e infusion". But, dont mind me, I am selfish here. I desire a great deal to see my favorite products from NG continue in 3.5 goodness....err....Pathfinder RPG.
Ahhhh.... I can dream.
|
|
Actually their is a reason and it's called sales. Clark has said more than once unless I am very mistaken that sales on their 3.5e books was sharply down and most companies sales where down. Just because paizo can make 3.5 and do well doesn't mean all companies can. Necro being a smaller company has a much small margins of error.
It has been said by more than one person and no i don't have a link. That stores are not even ordering most of the 3.5 stuff since 4e was announced. With Paizo being the only exception really. So while I don't like that they are waiting I understand why they are waiting.
|
|
Well I can understand things from a money perpective. However I think that regardless of whatever edtion is chosen NG will definitly need to do some marketing to get the numbers they want.In that regard I think that if NG works out a deal with Paizo to have a PF:RPG logo or somthing on any forthcomming NG products and description citing compatability would go a long way to revitalizing sales.
Another thought I have is (and maybe Im off target here) Will the 4e players embrace Clarks vision of D&D? Im not sure. It seems to me that a very specific vision was had to create 4e in the first place, so Im not sure if all sorts of rules that goe against the design goals will be approved of, both by WotC and the commnuity itself.
Thats not a slight against Clark or anything just a thought. Im not interested in starting a flame war here.
All good points, and you are right, there are several considerations here. I respect all of your ideas, some of which are cold-hard facts. And by the way, I would not expect you to provide links, I will take you at your word....unlike other places where every word has to be accounted for with a link or a sign of by Amazon or a snarky blast by a stalker. But I digress; Clark has/had an agreement with Paizo for a partnership for more than one project. As for now, ToH is a future release in Pathfinder. A very welcome addition indeed. That as it is, does but invite the question of why cant Clark continue to publish in cooperation with Paizo? As Mr. Savage Screenmonkey said a bit ago "it would at least let him develop something for the time being". Not a direct quote, but close.
I am with Savage on this; 4e has a select (no links or Amazon figures) fan base, though gigantic, that will not take well to rules tinkering. You cant go on enworld or rpgnet and voice any indifference to the savior of games without starting a flamewar. I think if he is going 4e he needs to really go 4e and sign the GSL. If you want to support it, then support it. I will stress again that the revised GSL will be written in a different colored ink, but it will read the same. I could be wrong. And I offer to eat my hat if I am. In fact, I would love to eat my hat. In fact, I will go so far as to offer to buy you a gift card to your favotite restraunt for you and your significant other (Mistress) if the GSL allows Clark to do as he wishes. When ToH 4e has a release date, dinner is on me.
Please dont take my words as my tone. I have a big warm smile on my face here. If WotC were relying on 3pp support, the revised GSL would be done and in print and Clark would have it in his hands.
But you are right on this for sure, either way we must wait. Clark is in a position to wait, and that is pleasing. But he has said it himself.....he is getting bored. Mean time 4-ons play 4e without NG and 3-tards play Pathfinder/3.5 without NG. Sad.....but so true.
|
|
Well to have a PFRPG logo on the books would take Paizo to finalize that. Which they have said they are working on such a logo for other companies to support them. But unless I missed it, i don't believe it is done. So for Necro other than it saying on one corner published by Paizo there would be no difference to their current books.
I agree i personally think if marketed threw Paizo and with them that Necro could sell enough to make it worth wile to do. My understanding is Clark has his serious doubts about it and he would be in a better position to know.
I know long ago he said as long as Necro broke even he would keep the company going, so to me that suggest he believes right or wrong. That publishing 3.5e books right now even threw Paizo they wouldn't be likely to even break even.
So while I am not sure i agree with his position. I think necro stuff would sell better partnered with Paizo with a good marketing than they believe. But they do know the business better and i certainly understand why they don't want to take the chance.
I mean think of it this way, they take the chance make say 3-4 3.5 books all lose money and then poof no more Necro. Or they can wait until they are sure they can make money or at least more likely to. In that light, i would rather they wait. Of course their is the chance their fan base dwindles to much and they can't recapture enough to waiting this long with no products. So damned if you do and damned if you don't. A demon princes favorite thing, just he prefers making others make that kind of choice. :)
|
|
3-tards! Thats freakin Hilarious! I love it. I am a 3-tard all the way...
both of you make good points, and in the end all we can do is wait. But I honestly feel that sometimes in business (and thats what this really comes down to) you need to take a calculated risk.
Clark is a smart guy and Im sure that since he has a day job he feels that moving forward is to much of an unnececary risk. But sometimes its the fear of making a bad mistake that paralyses us from doing anything at all. I mean everyone makes mistakes even smart people.
Personally I think its a bigger mistake to do nothing, but thats just my opinion. I guess what Im trying to say is I want to trust that Clark is making the best choice for NG, but part of me wonders if this current holding pattern is more out of fear of making a bad choice in either direction that would close NG down for good or what.
Sir Screenmonkey most profoundly put. Your sentiments are mine. Ok...lets get back to playing Pathfinder RPG dude! I love this game man. I think it would be cool if Clark would just use 3.5 rules and the OGL and tewwk the monster creation to be similar to what ever he finds so fabulous in 4e. What a cool project that could be with Paizo. Anyone here seen or have Classic Monsters Revisited? I cant put it down. This thing just makes the flavorful creative juices flow..... Paizo stuff makes me want to play and whats worse....its like that old 1e feeling. This team of writers is fabulous.
Ya bad about this, as it was the only chance in hell[ ok several hell's, the abyss, a couple demi-planes and a well of many worlds] Of even getting me to look at a 4e book.
ya it kinda hurt me............I had this odd high school math room flashback looking at it.... Not my game at all.
Hah.....same hear man, take a look at my avatar. This is an actual picture of me after having skipped into my FLGS and picked up a copy of the 4e PHB off the shelf and thumbed through it. My face was stuck like this until the revised GSL was announced.
I will stick with 3.5/Pathfinder
The new consensus here in the game store I frequent, is that folks are enjoying 4e as a miniatures war-game not unlike D&D. They love it, but they are not playing it as a campaign setting or role playing game. I think that is where Clark is coming from. He feels it lost its soul. Sure, I agree, at least what I have seen and heard is that it is not playable without the miniatures. If you are into that, its a great game. So, for those who like the miniatures and the 4e style, but feel cheated on role-play, maybe Clark is your man....if he can pull it off. Cant get that GSL out of my mind....
As much as I like NG and those who drive it, I am not sure there will be a market. I wont go near anymore 4e. In my crystal ball I see that 4e folks will not be particularly turned on by this product, should it materialize. There's that darn pesky GSL to contend with too.
Shameless promotion: Work on something spectacular for early PF RPG next August in time for GenCon.
I'm really curious to see how the Pathfinder RPG is received next August. I hope things go really well.
I also wonder how it will impact WotC long term (quality wise) that many of the best 3.x freelancers they had (Paizo staff writers) are not working on 4E stuff.
I'm really curious to see how the Pathfinder RPG is received next August. I hope things go really well.
I also wonder how it will impact WotC long term (quality wise) that many of the best 3.x freelancers they had (Paizo staff writers) are not working on 4E stuff.
Whoa....Mr. Mage, you have an incredibly good point there. I think however, that WotC may actually realize this fact. I am not sure they will be competing for the same audience over time. Pathfinder, as evidenced by the writing, art, and lay-out (a lot of time developing the setting) will be a "role"-players game. I believe (already started down the path) that WotC direction is toward an encounters/melee game; much more of a "roll"-playing table-top/WoW-type wargame.
Well, that's my take on it. As time goes on and if WotC keep moving toward an entrnched miniatures-dependent game, I think more "oldschoolers" will jump off. Lets hope they support Pathfinder and that we end up with great products from NG and others that will support great settings like the Wilderlands. I am such a dreamer eh?
As I said on the Necro boards, it is interesting to me how many posters I've seen that have tried 4E and found it to be missing something. (It's not a majority by any means, but it is not insignificant either.) I have doubts about the staying power for this game. (Of course, I had doubts about the initial appeal too and I was apparently quite wrong, so take the rest for what it's worth.)
In my opinion Clark's comments about the 4E game having lost its soul are spot on.
I think that 4E could certainly fill a niche, and it may indeed be a great introduction to the genre for new players. Who knows, maybe it will actually grow the hobby.
However, I have serious doubts. The cost barrier to entry in the game may be too high - espeically in these economic times. To DM/play the complete 4E (or at least, to get the same breadth you could in Core 3.5), not only do you need to buy the Core 3, you need to buy PHB2 and Adventurer's Vault). For a DM, that's $160 or so for an entry fee + the cost of a good selction of minis ($50?). I guess a player (if the DM supplies the minis) would only need the PHB1 and PHB2 and Adventurer's Vault, so that's a $95 buy-in. I think it's still too high (and it climbs higher with each new release) - especially since a new player could simply go online and play an RPG for only $10/month that requires virtually no prep time, math, or design time.
But for many of us who have no interest in such a different system, there's really no point to switching to 4E. I'm so glad that Paizo is sticking with 3.5 as the base ruleset.
You know, looking back at the day that Paizo made the announcement that they were sticking with 3.5 and that they were going to take it and run with it as Pathfinder RPG; I can remember where I was. Certainly not as big as the JFK assassination (not born yet) or 911 by any means, but I remember where I was and what I felt.
Months leading up to that, post 4e announcement, 3.5 sales dropped, all development haulted (Tegel Manor dang it!) and the distributors refused to ship or even touch 3.5. There are game stores here upset that they cannot even buy direct to get some 3.5 on the shelf. There is a mind-set to be sure with distributors as well that 4e will make them more cash. I mean look at HD TV sales this year. Manufacturers and retailers love obsoleting last year's technology, it means we have to go and repurchase again.
Paizo is thinking this through. They have the best writers, Monte Cook on board for rules, the best art work, and they have cost in mind as well. The PHB and DMG are all in one book. I am expecting the MM or bestiary, what ever it gets named, will be pretty dog-gone complete. They have their bases covered.
Sometimes you have to make that jump. Take a chance, get off the fence, stop hoping for a ship to come in, get off the pot.... Thats what concerns me on Clarks's idea with 4e. 3.5 was saved by Pathfinder RPG. Not so sure 4e needs saving. If it is hitting the spot for "younger" gamers, or who-ever the target audience is, then do we really need a 4.5? Maybe that is not what it is, more like an options for making 4e into a "role" playing game for those who like that. Why not just save some cash and stick with Pathfinder, which still is a "role" playing game. Making another rule set seems copy-cat at this point, even if that is not what it is....it will be the perception.
I think the effort would be better spent on enhancing Pathfinder material. I know, selfish on my part....I do not deny this.
One last point...... the wall of doom.....GSL
There is a mind-set to be sure with distributors as well that 4e will make them more cash. I mean look at HD TV sales this year. Manufacturers and retailers love obsoleting last year's technology, it means we have to go and repurchase again.
I think it is absolutely true that, as a whole, something that is "new" can be a powerful draw that excites people. The PR build-up, the anticipation, etc. are all very exciting ways to entice people to buy in to anything.
The problem with "new", though, is that once the newness wears off, people that jumped on board because it was new start moving on to the next "new" thing. I would not be surprised if 4E is affected by this sooner rather than later.
By the time Necro gets around to making their own version (if it happens) may actually work out if people are ready for the next "new" thing.
I didnt look at it that way Dave Mage. I like your analysis. I would like to add that some, I say "some", of our generation dont mind sticking with what they have if it works for them, rather than chasing after the "NEW" shiny thing. So I think there are two things at work for Paizo. 1. New thing syndrome (PF RPG) and 2. Something solid and already functioning (3.5). I like your thoughts on sooner rather than later on the "want something else" with 4e.
I have seen the same thing. A groud swell of sales for 4e, but afterward, an honest assessment of the difference in play and focus of the game.
On several of the forums it seems that there are some folks who kind of looked at 4e/Official WotC 4e as a religion or find some fierce need to be patriotic to the official "game" called D&D. When these thoughts are voiced, a flame war starts. You gotta ask yourself "why am I getting so excited over this?" maybe the game wasnt what it was billed to be and I bought in too early....buyer remorse?
I say, there isnt a right or wrong. Its what you like. I just want to be able to get more of what I like. I would like to see NG continue in the old fashion but not with 4e. As Clark has hinted at and as many players are finding.....4e is not D&D, its a great D&D-like table-top miniatures game. Call it an evolution if you will. Clark wants to fix it.
Judging by the reaction to Clark's comments on ENWorld and RPGNet, it does appear that many 4E supporters might not be exactly enamored by the idea of him 'redesigning 4E to give it a 1E feel'.
Clark, if you are still reading this, let me assure you that your efforts would be highly appreciated by many of us who have decided to stay with 3.5E or switch to Pathfinder. Even though 4E is surely a much bigger market overall, as a proportion probably more of us would welcome a product designed to enhance the AD&D feel for 3.5E/Pathfinder. So if you ever get tired out on 4E for whatever reason or will just desire a change of pace, we will eagerly anticipate your AD&D feel enhancing products for 3.5E/Pathfinder.
I don't usually get in on the editions debate but this seems like a great opportunity for me to voice my opinion on the topic.
I read 4E and I didn't think it sucked nearly as much as most folks. I didn't run out and buy the books but my group and I made up some characters and fooled around with it a bit. We don't use minis and it played just fine for us. We had fun and that was that. If I wasn't in the middle of Shackled City and lacked the money to blow on the core books, I might make the switch.
I still play 3.5 and quite enjoy it. I'm not riding the new wave to go with 4E but I'm not a hater, either. Different rules I don't think take away the soul of a game, it's all in how you play it and run it.
This GSL thing, like the magazines, is a sore spot for many and it sucks Wizard's isn't on the ball a little more, but hey, we can't rely on Wizards of the Coast all the time, just like we couldn't rely on TSR. This isn't anything new, the company might be bigger but they're still making the same mistakes of fracturing their fanbase and releasing sub par material. It was the third party companies that gave 3E and 3.5 the best material and I think 4E will eventually be the same.
I was glad to see Necromancer go the way of 4E. I thought to myself this was a great idea. Now we have two great companies, Paizo and Necromancer, that can support both sides of the fence. The freelancers can hop back and forth as their tastes suit them and we get great products in support of both sides of the schism. Everybody wins.
Another thought I have is (and maybe Im off target here) Will the 4e players embrace Clarks vision of D&D? Im not sure. It seems to me that a very specific vision was had to create 4e in the first place, so Im not sure if all sorts of rules that goe against the design goals will be approved of, both by WotC and the commnuity itself.
Well speaking for myself I'd be very interested in seeing what he does if he goes down a route intended to add some 1st edition feel to 4E. I'm heading partially down this route myself (and I did the same with 3.x) so it would be of interest to me to check out what he's done. If the quality was there and the ideas were interesting I'd definitly buy such a product.
That said I'm not sure how much of an issue some of the problems he's sees really are - long term. I suspect that certain issues will fade away as WotC releases more supplement books - things like a lack of options in the character class will be less and less of an issue as more and more books come out. A few years down the road and we'll be talking about bloat again - thats just the nature of the game since WotC wants to sell splat books, lots and lots of splat books.
Other areas he is looking into clearly are a move away from the design principles of 4E. I think most specifically the idea that low level characters are weak and easy to kill while high level ones are stunningly powerful is something that is pretty classical to the game but was definitly removed from 4E which went with a more streamlined model were characters are never really weak and never phenomenally powerful.
That'd take a complete overhaul of character classes and, while an interesting goal, might be really hard to pull off. Quite simply that makes NG 4E products basically incompatible with everyone elses 4E products because characters of the same level cannot be compared - which means monsters can't be compared and magic can't be compared. Even if it makes for a more 1E feeling game I'm not at all sure that its viable as marketed product. redesigning every class would take up tons of space and result in players either playing NG 4E or all other 4Es but never both becuase they don't mix. Can't stick a NG 4E character into a WotC 4E adventure becuase the power levels are completely different.
|
|
Well that was me just sort of thinking out loud.
I would still prefer to see NG put out adventuresover rules books
Im sure that fans of NG will pick somthing like this up, and that it might be of some intrest to 4e fans general.
Im just not convinced that what Clark thinks is missing from 4e is a feeling that is widly held by the 4e community. I could be way off base here.Im not a 4e guy, so I know jack about anything thats just my gut opinion.
Im just not convinced that what Clark thinks is missing from 4e is a feeling that is widly held by the 4e community. I could be way off base here.Im not a 4e guy, so I know jack about anything thats just my gut opinion.
I think its going to depend a lot on what Clark thinks is missing. I also think that he should think very carefully about how he chooses to implement changes because there is a really significant danger of creating a game that is essentially incomputable with the rest of 4E. If he does that I think sales will essentially tank. I might even like what he has done but if I can't use it with the rest of my 4E material then I'm going to have to take a pass.
If, on the other hand, he supplements what 4E has done then I'm much more interested.
So for example he might decide to implement 'low level' D&D in his game. Now he can do that by redesigning all the classes and completely changing their power levels compared to standard 4E but I think that would be a big mistake.
A better option, IMO, would be to introduce negative levels. A 1st level 4E character has some pretty bucko hps and stats and such. Why not reverse engineer that so that a character starts off with significantly less stats at negative 5th level and maybe has no powers or feats few hps and does not gain any of the proficiency bonuses for using weapons. Then, over the course of 5 levels one could add all of these things back granting bonuses to stats that bring the character up to a 30 point buy, granting extra hps at each level and giving out the starting feats and proficiency bonuses. Couple this with templates and rules for reducing monsters in the same way and we can have low hp players fighting low hp kobolds and yet still be able to use all the rest of the material that everyone else is making for 4E once the players eliminate all the negative levels and become 1st level proper as 4E understands it to be. This method means that what NG is doing is still compatible with the rest of the game and yet has some of that low level feel of older editions.