Just wondering...did you have the same opinion when 3E came out? Because it was just as far a leap away, if not further, from the older versions as 4E is from 3E.
I, for one, really liked 3e from the get-go and never really found it that alien compared to 2nd ed. But this was at a time where 2nd ed was feeling very outdated, and they really needed to bring it up to 'modern standards'. The RPG scene had changed a lot since the 80s. 2nd ed hadn't really (at least not for the better).
I don't really feel 3e was lacking behind everything else these days, that a completely reinvention was warranted. 3e might feel a bit bloated for having been around a number of years, but the system itself didn't (doesn't) feel old and stale. If it did, I probably wouldn't be playing Pathfinder today.
And, just for the record, I was in the camp that was really looking forward to 4e (having played SW:SE). My excitement for 4e was only rivaled by my disappointment when I finally got to read it.
If WotC wanted to bring new brand of players to the hobby, I feel they would have been better off opening up a new game line specifically designed to reach out to that market, while keeping their '3e' styled branch, and not discard large segments of their old playerbase. I can only assume that they expected everyone to jump ship, so that maintaining an '3e' gameline wouldn't be profitable. I guess they can have a chat with Paizo about how that's going. :)
And what would it mean if PF 2.0 is more like 4e?
Losing me and probably many others as customers, depending on how close we're talking.
I think they should start numbering editions of D&D like Windows versions:
Windows 1.0
Windows 2.1
Windows 3.1
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows ME
Windows XP
Windows Vista
Windows 7
Where does that leave the various versions of NT, including 2000?
And 2000 was the first attempt to fuse the two lines. How does the line-fusing correspond to D&D?
And if D&D is Windows, where does that leave Pathfinder?
Also, if WoTC wanted to Capitalize on Paizo's success with Pathfinder, a better method would be to re-release all the 3.5 (and earlier) PDFs.This would have the advantage that it would start to "mend some fences" with the existing 3.5/PathfinderRPG crowd and not further upsetting their existing 4th edition player base.
Yeah, and they could have done this long ago. In fact, they never had to pull the PDFs at all.
Not thinking mending fences is a priority for them.
Did someone seriously say WotC screwed over Gygax and then went on to praise TSR.
Seriously.
That...that's where we've gone?
I have to agree with you there. Heck I am can not even I am pissed off the TSR screwed over Gygax consider what he did to Arenson...I just call it kharma.
While there were changes with the ToT, I would hardly compare them to the apocalypse that the Spellplague. I'm not an expert on either, but from what I know, the world was able to mostly recover from the ToT with relatively few major changes to the world at large, not to mention the fact that it played out over an extended period of time, giving people a chance to deal with it. The Spellplague destroyed magic as it was understood at the time, took out half a continent with half of another continent, and sent the entirety of Faerun into a tailspin, all within a matter of hours.
D&D was a good game with history and culture and WoTC chewed the game up and spit it into the faces of all its loyal fans and took advantage of them. They also screwed over Gigax which in my book i will never forgive.
I call Poe's Law.
Did I win? Do I get a cookie?
|
I actually like the 4E changes to FR, removing the Weave and Mistra, dumping down on Eleminister, changing things around, and doing what they did to DL, which I much perfere, but in a much more realistic and interesting way.
It also makes it sso much less generic or typical fantasy, and less like Greyhawk 2, in my opinion.
I actually like the 4E changes to FR, removing the Weave and Mistra, dumping down on Eleminister, changing things around, and doing what they did to DL, which I much perfere, but in a much more realistic and interesting way.
It also makes it sso much less generic or typical fantasy, and less like Greyhawk 2, in my opinion.
You are welcome to your opinions. I do have one question though...
How was getting rid of Weave (which was unique to the Realms) making it less generic Greyhawk 2 world?
Just wondering...did you have the same opinion when 3E came out? Because it was just as far a leap away, if not further, from the older versions as 4E is from 3E.
There are a lot of people who do not agree with that assessment either in mechanics, or feel of the game, or design philosophy, or any combination of those three elements. I think 4e is a much farther leap in all 3 cases than 3e was from 2e.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I have to agree with you there. Heck I am can not even I am pissed off the TSR screwed over Gygax consider what he did to Arenson...I just call it kharma.Did someone seriously say WotC screwed over Gygax and then went on to praise TSR.
Seriously.
That...that's where we've gone?
Stick around for one of these discussions long enough, and you'll find people claiming that TSR was a good shephard of D&D and that the company respected its fans and treated them well. Facts are of secondary importance when you're Really Very Angry.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
While I have the similar "You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! G!~ d&#n you all to hell!" reaction to the SpellPlauge, I think we'd have to see one other dynamic shift from WotC to get me interested in D&D again.
A return to the OGL, or an OGL type structure.
I don't see that happening.
Also if Pathfinder 2 was more like 4x, I'd likely drift away from there, OGL or not.
D&D was a good game with history and culture and WoTC chewed the game up and spit it into the faces of all its loyal fans and took advantage of them.
As one of the loyal fans you speak for, the game was not chewed up and spit into my face, and I was not taken advantage of. I think you probably need to narrow the subset of people you're capable of speaking on behalf of. Significantly.
I'm already playing 3.5, PFRPG and 4e. I suppose I don't really care that much about the game mechanics, I just like the activity of sitting around with friends and telling cooperative stories. Also I like challenges and tactics. I would still play 2e if I knew anyone else who played it.
|
|
I'd definitely give it a spin. I think 4e does the DM side of the screen better than PFRPG and I'd really like to see some of 4e's more gonzo concepts reworked into the more simulationist 3.5 rules-set.
Wait, this thread isn't in the 4th Ed subforum? That means ... we're on the free firing range!
So let me throw it off my chest:
4th Ed is a great, fun game* and I wish WotC won't abandon it anytime soon.**
* - it's just not up my alley.
** - yes, that's a geniuine wish, for more than one reason...
I completely agree with what Mr. Bag and My Fiendish Pony said.
Is it possible to tie the Forgotten Realms thing in with the original topic? Well, here's my attempt...
I think the difference between the Spellplague and the Time of Troubles is that, despite a few things here and there, you could ignore the Time of Troubles and not lose all that much in the 2nd edition Realms. Elminster was still a senile but insanely powerful archmage, Neverwinter was still a big city in the north, and your human PC from 1st edition was still playable without some sort of workaround. The Spellplague demolished entire areas of the setting, changed most of the main NPCs (even the ones who survived, like Elminster, are vastly different from what they once were), and made it so you could not easily bring someone with a normal human lifespan into the new Realms. THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY A BAD THING, but it hacked a lot of old Realms fans off because the jump was so large. Yes, the Time of Troubles made some big changes, but if you wanted to ignore it, you just had to use the 1st edition pantheon and make a few other tweaks here and there. The support for the 2nd and 3rd edition of the Realms was still easy enough to convert back to 1st edition, while the new Realms were made with something totally different in mind.
Now, folks who want to continue to play in the Realms could ignore the official canon, but there seems to be a strong pull drawing people toward what is supported. A lot of folks who didn't like the Realms seem to have migrated over to Golarion, which has a similar feel to them. Similarly, many of those who preferred 3rd edition moved over to Pathfinder, not because 3rd edition became unplayable, but because Pathfinder is still growing and changing, while 3rd edition has stopped, at least in an official capacity.
Tying it all back into the original topic, I don't think that D&D can easily recapture fans who stopped playing and moved to Pathfinder without Paizo making some sort of misstep. Pathfinder became a possible D&D replacement due to the fact that 3rd edition stopped, just as Golarion became a possible haven for old Realms players when official support for the pre-Spellplague Realms stopped. Had 4th edition been closer to 3rd edition, I don't think Pathfinder would have had the traction to get going. And had the post-Spellplague Realms been more compatible with the older versions, I think even those who didn't like 4th edition might have bought whatever 4th edition Realms stuff they could because they could have used it even if they weren't playing the new version of D&D.
4th edition and the post-Spellplague Forgotten Realms both signal Wizards of the Coast seeking out a new audience. Some of their old audience followed as well, but many others found a replacement game elsewhere. With viable replacements, I don't think WotC can go back - their best bet is to continue marching onward and build upon what they have, both with 4th edition D&D and the Forgotten Realms.
|
|
D&D was a good game with history and culture and WoTC chewed the game up and spit it into the faces of all its loyal fans and took advantage of them. They also screwed over Gigax which in my book i will never forgive.I call Poe's Law.
Did I win? Do I get a cookie?
No cookies for you, monster boy, but something even better: I'll send you some pictures of me doing the traditional Dwarven Beard Dance... nekkid!
No cookies for you, monster boy, but something even better: I'll send you some pictures of me doing the traditional Dwarven Beard Dance... nekkid!
Excellent. And people say these threads are pointless.
|
|
No cookies for you, monster boy, but something even better: I'll send you some pictures of me doing the traditional Dwarven Beard Dance... nekkid!Excellent. And people say these threads are pointless.
Tell me about it; and these people also call me "perverted" or "deranged"! By the way, would you also like to have a couple of pictures of my pit fiend servant, Little Tim? He can't dance, but he sure knows how to strike a killer pose...
Removed a bunch of posts and the replies to them - let's hope it can remain on-topic and not resort to personal attacks.
|
I could see this happening if D&D 4e doesn't perform to Hasbro's expectations. Hasbro then reacts by a) spinning off WotC, b) publishing D&D RPG material online only, as a MMORPG or a VTT/digital subscription-only, or c) ends publication of the D&D brand, and allows 3PP to license the D&D name. (option d) ceases publication of D&D as an RPG and keeps only the brand for licensed board games, is too horrible to consider)
Now if D&D didn't exist in the RPG industry anymore, the entire RPG industry may go under. But if WotC got spun off, or a third party was allowed to publish D&D material, this scenario could possible happen.
Now, in this apocalyptic scenario, my ideal situation would be for WotC to be sold to Paizo, though I don't know if they have the capital to make that a reality. Or barring that, I'd prefer Paizo was permitted to publish under the D&D license.
If WotC is in such sad state that they need to copy PFRPG to be successful, I'd be really worried about the RPG industry as a whole.
If D&D 5e wishes to be similar to Pathfinder, it would need to have the following:
1. A return to the 3.5 engine, but with significant retooling. This could be done without that much trouble.
2. A return to a main game world with a human-centric focus. This, again, is not that problematic.
3. Monsters that cleave closer to folkloric and literary sources, and thus resonate more in terms of storytelling, rather than attempting to create wonky stuff that you can cover with "product identity" in hopes of creating another Beholder. This would be hard, not because it's that difficult but because there are undoubtedly a pile of marketing and law types who think that this is the way things are done. It's not.
To paraphrase something Neil Gaiman said a few years ago (to an audience at Comicon, so there should even be video of this somewhere), when asked about the similarities between his character, Tim Hunter, and Harry Potter, given that both of them were the heralded child of magic, British, brown haired, wore glasses and had a pet owl, and whether he felt ripped off, his answer was "No. Jo Rowling is smart. If you realize that your boy wizard character looks too similar to someone else's character, you take off the glasses, make him a blond, give him a hawk instead of an owl. It's not hard."
About the only hard thing is explaining to marketing types that if nobody has done it before, there's probably a reason.
4. A focus on excellence in adventure creation. This I suspect would be troublesome, as it hasn't been WotC's focus.
There's probably more than that, but that's a good start of what I consider the problems with both the tail end of 3.5 as well as most of 4e.
I could see this happening if D&D 4e doesn't perform to Hasbro's expectations. Hasbro then reacts by a) spinning off WotC, b) publishing D&D RPG material online only, as a MMORPG or a VTT/digital subscription-only, or c) ends publication of the D&D brand, and allows 3PP to license the D&D name. (option d) ceases publication of D&D as an RPG and keeps only the brand for licensed board games, is too horrible to consider)
Now if D&D didn't exist in the RPG industry anymore, the entire RPG industry may go under. But if WotC got spun off, or a third party was allowed to publish D&D material, this scenario could possible happen.
Now, in this apocalyptic scenario, my ideal situation would be for WotC to be sold to Paizo, though I don't know if they have the capital to make that a reality. Or barring that, I'd prefer Paizo was permitted to publish under the D&D license.
If WotC is in such sad state that they need to copy PFRPG to be successful, I'd be really worried about the RPG industry as a whole.
*cough*
I think that only way one of these things would happen would be if Hasbro expectations were off the scale...
I don't really think that 4E is doing that bad, only that they were bit too active a bringing new stuff to the market. Way too mayn books released and now they sort of run of the interesting material.
|
|
I actually like the 4E changes to FR, removing the Weave and Mistra, dumping down on Eleminister, changing things around, and doing what they did to DL, which I much perfere, but in a much more realistic and interesting way.
It also makes it sso much less generic or typical fantasy, and less like Greyhawk 2, in my opinion.
You are welcome to your opinions. I do have one question though...
How was getting rid of Weave (which was unique to the Realms) making it less generic Greyhawk 2 world?
I just mean that D & D already had a generic, or rather a typical fantasy world, and in my opinion Greyhawk was superior. (Generic is a poor choice of words, I mean more like general basic, and am not referring to the watered-down version of Greyhawl in the Core books.)
I have never carred for the Weave besides that it makes the Shadow Weave semi-cool. And aside from as a base for the Shadow Weave, does not actually do anything for the game, mechanically.
Well, I personally don't think I will be buying any Wotc products again.
Not until they start supporting and publishing AD&D again . . .
<not holding my breath>
I went with Pathfinder mainly due to the good will built up around Paizo (both from my own experience and in speaking with others). Otherwise, I was content to remain with 3.5 and just pretty much write WoTC off.
What I'm getting at is, there is no commandment set in stone that you have to go out and buy the next thing that comes along, each time it comes along. There is no missing component to your life that can be filled in by keeping current with every RPG system.
There are people out there, who have given up on this totally, or who never even bought into 3.x much less 4ed or PF. They are perfectly happy playing 2nd Edition or OSRIC or GURPS or whatever, and the sky failed to fall and the world failed to end for them.
I've already written WoTC off for two reasons. The first is ill will. It is just how I feel. It needn't be cause for a flame war, and it needn't be taken personally by anybody. It just happens that after a decade of ups and downs, I don't particularly feel like dating that old girlfriend again.
The second is that I've played so many systems for so long, I just don't need anything they could give me. I am perfectly fine fixing things, houseruling, or even building entire systems myself. I have friends who will play with me no matter what. I don't see a situation happening where I couldn't get a game going in some fashion, so why pin all my hopes and good times to what Wizards does?