|
Ive tried and tried to hold my tounge for too bleedin long but this weekend was the straw that crippled the camel. So I go to my local gaming store and decide to run a game. Keep in mind there are tons of Pathfinder books on the shelves. These guys come in and have signed up for my game, when they see me pulling out Pathfinder books, they ask why I am not playing "Real D&D". Once I got the urge to kill under control, I calmly explained to them that I have been playing since 1983 and I would nail my head to a wall before playing 4th edition. I explained that I fell in love with 3.5 and when WOTC killed my beloved magazines, i.e. Dungeon and Dragon magazine, I gave up on WOTC feeling that they were moving away from what old school gamers liked and wanted. I loved the Open License of alot of the D20 systems because it opened up alot of ground for exploration for those of us used to doing things the old way. I loved having different resource materials available and built a rich gaming world because of it.
I dont like the 4th edition rules and game play. Now before you get out your pitch forks and torches, realize this is my personal experience. I love Pathfinder and I loved the idea of me not having to pack up my whole bleedin library and starting over. After all the way the Forgotten Realms got treated was unforgivable.
Anywhoo, I am still running my Pathfinder and 3.5 games and having a blast. I know that every time I go to a convention I get guff about this but oh well. I just needed to blow off steam before I exploded. As for "real D&D" they can keep it.
So...you didn't DM a game, after all? You just left and went home?
Really? Really...? This stuff? Really?
Everybody pick a side for this month's edition war.
|
|
So...you didn't DM a game, after all? You just left and went home?
I invited them to stay but it seemed like these guys had only ever played 4th. I showed them premade characters and 2 of the guys stayed but the other 3 tossed off. So I called a friend of mine, she and her brother filled out the group and had them run through a lower level adventure. The did have a good time and commented that it wasn't that different. I invited them to come back for the weekly game and see what they think. At least on of them has already signed up.
Its not a 4th edition vs. Pathfinder issue, its just helping others to realize that there are other alternatives. You dont have to go out and buy 4th edition to have a good roleplaying experience.
Yeah, I know how you feel. In Hawaii, you pull out Pathfinder and people give looks of disgust. 4e is the reigning champ over there.
|
|
Really? Really...? This stuff? Really?
Everybody pick a side for this month's edition war.
Its not an edition war at all. Its just letting people know that there is 4th edition and then there are others. Its not about whats best its about what YOU like best. If you want to refer to anything as real D&D shouldnt it be 1st edition when Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson actually had something to do with the game?
Its not a 4th edition vs. Pathfinder issue, its just helping others to realize that there are other alternatives. You dont have to go out and buy 4th edition to have a good roleplaying experience.
Its not an edition war at all. Its just letting people know that there is 4th edition and then there are others. Its not about whats best its about what YOU like best. If you want to refer to anything as real D&D shouldnt it be 1st edition when Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson actually had something to do with the game?Really? Really...? This stuff? Really?
Everybody pick a side for this month's edition war.
Your title suggests that you are voicing a problem with 4E. If you had a problem with a specific group of gamers you encountered perhaps you should title your thread with a little less unprovoked malice towards a different game system.
|
Your title suggests that you are voicing a problem with 4E. If you had a problem with a specific group of gamers you encountered perhaps you should title your thread with a little less unprovoked malice towards a different game system.Its not a 4th edition vs. Pathfinder issue, its just helping others to realize that there are other alternatives. You dont have to go out and buy 4th edition to have a good roleplaying experience.
So...you didn't DM a game, after all? You just left and went home?
I prefer to just say 4th edition is inferior.
It is the boy band of the role playing universe. Popular, but fundamentally inferior in so many ways that you can only facepalm when someone tries to argue it's just as good.
|
|
I love the boy band reference.
Yes I do have something against 4th Edition. A good number of people are trying to push it as the be all end all. The game has been around for a long time and seen alot of changes. As for Gnomes are monsters and Tieflings are a normal race. OK....
I have yet to see Paizo saying...lets make a new edition of Pathfinder so we can put out more books and piss off our players.
I have yet to see Paizo saying...lets make a new edition of Pathfinder so we can put out more books and piss off our players.
See, now I'm convinced you're trying to start an edition war.
I have yet to see Paizo saying...lets make a new edition of Pathfinder so we can put out more books and piss off our players.See, now I'm convinced you're trying to start an edition war.
...I'm pretty sure there is a deep schism in the RPG industry, judging by the fact that a large number of DND's player base broke off and bought Pathfinder after 4e was released. Pretending it isn't there doesn't make it not so.
...I'm pretty sure there is a deep schism in the RPG industry, judging by the fact that a large number of DND's player base broke off and bought Pathfinder after 4e was released. Pretending it isn't there doesn't make it not so.I have yet to see Paizo saying...lets make a new edition of Pathfinder so we can put out more books and piss off our players.See, now I'm convinced you're trying to start an edition war.
I'm not pretending there aren't differences in people's interests. I'm just trying to weed out the vocal minority that want to rehash the same old arguments for another year from those that genuinely have something to complain about. Titling a thread "A General Rant Against 4th Edition" without listing any specific complaints against the system itself in the origional post shows that this thread will likely fall in the first category. Right now I'm not interested in defending the merits of either system nor exposing their follies.
I don't think making a thread against 4th edition is the answer. I probably would have made a thread against jerks if I wanted to blow off steam since the issue is not a 4th edition issue. It is a "people" issue.
4th edition did not walk into that store and harass you. Gamers did. I don't play 4th edition by the way. I just see no need to bash a gaming system, especially when the system is not the issue.
I don't think making a thread against 4th edition is the answer. I probably would have made a thread against jerks if I wanted to blow off steam since the issue is not a 4th edition issue. It is a "people" issue.
4th edition did not walk into that store and harass you. Gamers did. I don't play 4th edition by the way. I just see no need to bash a gaming system, especially when the system is not the issue.
+1
Thank you for expressing my thoughts much more politely. You are correct, as always.
|
|
I don't think making a thread against 4th edition is the answer. I probably would have made a thread against jerks if I wanted to blow off steam since the issue is not a 4th edition issue. It is a "people" issue.
4th edition did not walk into that store and harass you. Gamers did. I don't play 4th edition by the way. I just see no need to bash a gaming system, especially when the system is not the issue.
WOTC, in the form of 4th edition, killed 3.5
It killed support for it, and then urinated on all of the worlds that had been created over time. It ret-conned what many of us loved, in a clear money grab.
Paizo cast a reincarnation spell and 3.5 was revived as something different, arguably better.
The OP seemed to be saying that he was upset his friendly local game store was full of people who didn't realize 4e is the new kid on the block, and called DnD only because they bought the name.
|
|
Fine if you want specifics Ill give you specifics, or if you would like the name changed fine. The general rant was about 4th being referenced as "real D&D". As for specifics about the game itself alot of the tripe they pulled with the whole lets cut everyone out of the industry. When the whole thing took off they werent taking into account their gamers or fan bases, yes this is all industry related. As for the game itself, it seemed like it was fitting itself more directly for an entirely different group of people instead of the usual gamers. The rules changes suck especially when some people have gone through all the freakin trouble to setup whole worlds and year long campaigns. Im rambling now say what you need and Ill delete the thread.
|
|
[QUOTE="ciretose"
WOTC, in the form of 4th edition, killed 3.5
It killed support for it, and then urinated on all of the worlds that had been created over time. It ret-conned what many of us loved, in a clear money grab.
Paizo cast a reincarnation spell and 3.5 was revived as something different, arguably better.
The OP seemed to be saying that he was upset his friendly local game store was full of people who didn't realize 4e is the new kid on the block, and called DnD only because they bought the name.
Ta mate for clarifying that I was getting a little put off.
The OP seemed to be saying that he was upset his friendly local game store was full of people who didn't realize 4e is the new kid on the block, and called DnD only because they bought the name.
That's not a rant against 4E then, and it shouldn't be labeled as such. It is a rant against asshat gamers and corporate America.
I would nail my head to a wall before playing 4th edition.
That seems just as close minded as the guys who wouldn't give Pathfinder a try. I love Pathfinder, but I've enjoyed games of 4E and Gamma World. I have games that I prefer when I GM, but I'll play any game a GM wants to run. From OD&D to 4E to Pathfinder to GURPS to Warhammer. I could go on. A good GM who is enthusiastic about his game makes any system fun.
I would nail my head to a wall before playing 4th edition.That seems just as close minded as the guys who wouldn't give Pathfinder a try. I love Pathfinder, but I've enjoyed games of 4E and Gamma World. I have games that I prefer when I GM, but I'll play any game a GM wants to run. From OD&D to 4E to Pathfinder to GURPS to Warhammer. I could go on. A good GM who is enthusiastic about his game makes any system fun.
This thread is a general rant about 4E; you've got to get all of that reason and logic out of here.
I don't think making a thread against 4th edition is the answer. I probably would have made a thread against jerks if I wanted to blow off steam since the issue is not a 4th edition issue. It is a "people" issue.
4th edition did not walk into that store and harass you. Gamers did. I don't play 4th edition by the way. I just see no need to bash a gaming system, especially when the system is not the issue.
WOTC, in the form of 4th edition, killed 3.5
It killed support for it, and then urinated on all of the worlds that had been created over time. It ret-conned what many of us loved, in a clear money grab.
Paizo cast a reincarnation spell and 3.5 was revived as something different, arguably better.
The OP seemed to be saying that he was upset his friendly local game store was full of people who didn't realize 4e is the new kid on the block, and called DnD only because they bought the name.
I thought he was upset because they were rude enough to try to tell him what to play more so than anything else. The "Real D&D" comment was an off-handed way to say you are playing the wrong system. I have seen more than one thread online about gamer A telling gamer B his system sucks while at a gaming store, when no opinion is asked.
I do see your point, but I see that as a reason to not like WoTC, not bash a system. It never really does any good.Yeah I am aware that one person's bash is another person's legitimate complaint.
|
|
The OP seemed to be saying that he was upset his friendly local game store was full of people who didn't realize 4e is the new kid on the block, and called DnD only because they bought the name.That's not a rant against 4E then, and it shouldn't be labeled as such. It is a rant against asshat gamers and corporate America.
Well I could get into the specifics of how 4E is basically attempting to make a computer game with Dice, likely to better synergize with the subscription service and future game systems platforms.
But I will quote a review I read that explains it better.
"Where D&D (3.5) was more like a bag of lego bricks before – a little crude but you could put it together any way you liked, now it’s more like a plastic model. The pieces go together certain ways and you’re told how it should be. Everything is channelled, quantified, laid out as to how it ‘should’ be and while you can fiddle around a bit you’re really only making cosmetic changes."
The "Real D&D" comment was an off-handed way to say you are playing the wrong system. I have seen more than one thread online about gamer A telling gamer B his system sucks while at a gaming store, when no opinion is asked.
Thac0 is way better than BAB! What is this 3rd edition nonesense!? Not only are my saving throws changing all of the time, but enemy spells have different DCs? When did the longbow get better than a dart for a fighter? What's my PPD? I can backstab him while he's looking right at me? Bah. What do you mean clerics get to pick their "domains" - where are my spheres? Pholtus isn't in the core rules? Stupid 3.0; why don't people play REAL D&D? 2EAD&D is the better system. [/satire]
The OP seemed to be saying that he was upset his friendly local game store was full of people who didn't realize 4e is the new kid on the block, and called DnD only because they bought the name.That's not a rant against 4E then, and it shouldn't be labeled as such. It is a rant against asshat gamers and corporate America.Well I could get into the specifics of how 4E is basically attempting to make a computer game with Dice, likely to better synergize with the subscription service and future game systems platforms.
But I will quote a review I read that explains it better.
"Where D&D (3.5) was more like a bag of lego bricks before – a little crude but you could put it together any way you liked, now it’s more like a plastic model. The pieces go together certain ways and you’re told how it should be. Everything is channelled, quantified, laid out as to how it ‘should’ be and while you can fiddle around a bit you’re really only making cosmetic changes."
See, that would make for a constructive discussion on the differences both percieved and real within the editions which would be entertaining.
|
|
See, that would make for a constructive discussion on the differences both percieved and real within the editions which would be entertaining.The OP seemed to be saying that he was upset his friendly local game store was full of people who didn't realize 4e is the new kid on the block, and called DnD only because they bought the name.That's not a rant against 4E then, and it shouldn't be labeled as such. It is a rant against asshat gamers and corporate America.Well I could get into the specifics of how 4E is basically attempting to make a computer game with Dice, likely to better synergize with the subscription service and future game systems platforms.
But I will quote a review I read that explains it better.
"Where D&D (3.5) was more like a bag of lego bricks before – a little crude but you could put it together any way you liked, now it’s more like a plastic model. The pieces go together certain ways and you’re told how it should be. Everything is channelled, quantified, laid out as to how it ‘should’ be and while you can fiddle around a bit you’re really only making cosmetic changes."
Our group gave it a try when it first came out, as it is much, much, easier to DM.
But that is because it is much, much, less versatile.
Players functionally do the same thing most of the time, calling it something different. Roles are very, specifically defined. It is pre-packaged "fun" that feels like a video game.
If you like WoW or Diablo, it feels familiar. But when I want those experiences, I play WoW or Diablo.
When I want to be amazed how my friends used what options are available to create interesting characters in complex and intricate worlds created by my DM...
Different experience.
I understand my Video Game has a limited number of variables we have to work within, and therefore variance will be limited.
My role playing game should be about "how can we make this happen" not about how we can keep you within the lines.
|
The general rant was about 4th being referenced as "real D&D".
Well, it is. Which is presumably why Paizo never mentions D&D by name, since they can't. Hasbo own the D&D trademark so D&D is what they say it is. Whether you want to play it is another matter. But clearly 3e isn't 1e or 2e either, which are presumably other people's formative experiences with D&D and their "real" versions of it. So this argument could be had in many permutations.
That said, thank you (sincerely) for not putting this on the 4e board. While I don't really agree with your stance, you are entitled to it. I (and probably others who frequent it) just prefer that the 4e board be kept for those who do like it.
Perhaps the problem at the game store was one of marketing? Did you advertise your game as "D&D"? You mentioned you had a sign-up sheet. Currently, D&D is 4th edition. If you construed that the game would be D&D and 4th Edition being the current incarnation of the system, it's only logical that people would assume that it would be a 4th edition game. It sounds like you are running a Pathfinder Society weekly game. So I really would find it confusing how any participants would be confused on the matter.
I've played 4th edition since launch. I've been wowed by the previews, disillusioned by the game play, and have actually started a weekly PF RotRL campaign. But I still find myself in my PF games wishing the PC's had healing surges. And I long for the flexibility of character generation when I play in my friends weekly 4e game. Both games have their strengths and both of them are the natural successors to Dungeons & Dragons.
If you've got rude people in your game store, I'm sorry for that. I wish anyone I know would be able to give Savage Worlds a change. But if task resolution isn't determined by a d20, they want no part in it. But after you vented about the rudeness these players showed to you with "Real D&D", you turned around and called everyone who plays and enjoys (yes I still enjoy 4e, I'm just disillusioned with combat) 4e as being wrong for not playing the "Real D&D".
- Josh
Our group gave it a try when it first came out, as it is much, much, easier to DM.
But that is because it is much, much, less versatile.
Players functionally do the same thing most of the time, calling it something different. Roles are very, specifically defined. It is pre-packaged "fun" that feels like a video game.
If you like WoW or Diablo, it feels familiar. But when I want those experiences, I play WoW or Diablo.
When I want to be amazed how my friends used what options are available to create interesting characters in complex and intricate worlds created by my DM...
Different experience.
I understand my Video Game has a limited number of variables we have to work within, and therefore variance will be limited.
My role playing game should be about "how can we make this...
I've always been a heavy fluff and flavor type of DM. I like memorable character personalities and descriptions for both player characters and NPCs. My group had many times altered the flavor of what options they had available to them to make it seem unique and fun everytime, regardless of how many times the option had been used.
I've played 3 full 4E sessions in my life (I prefer the 3.x style of play and enjoy PF material), so I'm by no means a guru of the system, but from my experience it was fun, quick to learn, and easy to design and run cinematic encounters. I feel that WotC put out a really high-quality product (I feel the physical quality to be better than Paizo, if not the content - I can expand upon this if you would like) and a lot of the faults percieved within the system are caused by players feeling they are forced to play within confines of the default setting. People often compain that 4e ruin FR or some nonesense, but nobody stops to think that they are the masters of their own game world and can alter the setting as they see fit.
I can't speak to the WoW and Diablo references because I don't play computer games at all.
Overall I think 4e is a well balanced system that not only facilitates social interaction and cooperation like its predecessors, but perhaps even encourages it more.
I actually have more complaints with 3.x and PF than I do with 4e, but my issues with 4e are a lot greater. I don't feel any is an innately better system as they are both entertaining in different ways and I appreciate all of the hard work that the designers of each system put into their product.
The fact that you're even discussing this with someone named 'Zealot' amuses me to no end.I have yet to see Paizo saying...lets make a new edition of Pathfinder so we can put out more books and piss off our players.See, now I'm convinced you're trying to start an edition war.
You know, I'd laugh a whole lot less if you weren't on these forums.
I can understand hating WOTC, I really can. I'm a BIG fan of 4E over PF/3.5, and I can't stand the company, their business practices, their customer support, and their general community (which is why I'm always on here).
BUT... I feel that their product is a far superior system to the shell that PF threw over the 3.5 frame. Do I like their modules? No. Do I like their accessories? Hardly (CB is helpful) the only books I have are PHB's 1-3, MM's 1-2, and DMG.
I see so many people rage against a system they have "played a little when it first came out", a lot of it because the company itself. The other is for "lack of options".
Of course when it first came out there were limited options and nothing more than ability spamming. At first level to a WHOLE NEW system, their won't be a lot of options. At 1st lvl when 3.0 first came out, their weren't many options either, or at 1st in 2E or 1E.
PF may have had more options, because it could rely on a whole ten year product line for backwards compatability.
As systems go, for a 20+ years gamer, that only plays computer RPG's because I'm unable to game every day, and am a hard core rules lawyer (to a fault), 4E just produces a smoother and more flavorful gaming session. Mainly because in my hardcore rules-lawyer group (at least 5 out of 7) there are so fewer RAW/RAI arguments. Sometimes fluff thrown into the rules just confuses interpretations. Keep fluff out of my rules, and it makes it easier for me to enhance it in play.
I just hated what they did to Faerun. And then turned Ravenloft into a board game.
They discarded the previous game mechanics completely. The magic items were of a different power level depending on your level. The combats still take forever to resolve, for some reason, even with experienced players.
I have played 4e. I had a great GM. He was what brought me to the table. 4e was a fall back option, since that was THE game in my area, I had no choice in the matter.
I don't usually play D&D, but when I do, I play Pathfinder.
|
They discarded the previous game mechanics completely.
Not exactly. You can find rules for 4E's Defenses in Unearthed Arcana. Skill consolidations, static HP, all of those are pretty much just d20 houserules.
|
|
I prefer to just say 4th edition is inferior.
It is the boy band of the role playing universe. Popular, but fundamentally inferior in so many ways that you can only facepalm when someone tries to argue it's just as good.
I perfer to think of 4th ed. as the windows vista of the RPG world. A review I saw online said he felt like he was reading the rulebook to the offical World of Warcraft table top RPG. More so then when he read the accual 3.5 World of Warcraft books. That speaks volumes IMO.
My group did try 4th ed. when it came out. The first combat from the first module took 4 hours. We are all experenced players. We had a heck of a time keeping track of everything, who marked who, whos blooded, what powers were used up. That is easier? We tryed it a few more times thinking we had to get used to the system but it never got easier. So we went back to 3.5 then Pathfinder.
We are all experenced players. We had a heck of a time keeping track of everything, who marked who, whos blooded, what powers were used up. That is easier?
In other d20 games how do you keep track of what status effects the enemies have and for what duration, who needs healing, and what spells have been used? These are no different. Why can you track them better with more and differing variables in another system than in a new system?
Maybe it's the rules-lawyers in us, but my group read the PHB front to back (each of us) before we played. It's how I did it for 2nd and 3.0 (not 1E though, the mistakes I made there is why I read the books first now).
WOTC, in the form of 4th edition, killed 3.5...The OP seemed to be saying that he was upset his friendly local game store was full of people who didn't realize 4e is the new kid on the block, and called DnD only because they bought the name.
You do know that WotC owned the name before 4th edition right? You know that they produced 3.5 right? By your logic 3.5 was only D&D because they bought the name.
|
|
You do know that WotC owned the name before 4th edition right? You know that they produced 3.5 right? By your logic 3.5 was only D&D because they bought the name.
WOTC, in the form of 4th edition, killed 3.5...The OP seemed to be saying that he was upset his friendly local game store was full of people who didn't realize 4e is the new kid on the block, and called DnD only because they bought the name.
I know the history.
Do you
http://www.salon.com/technology/feature/2001/03/23/wizards
You do know that WotC owned the name before 4th edition right? You know that they produced 3.5 right? By your logic 3.5 was only D&D because they bought the name.
WOTC, in the form of 4th edition, killed 3.5...The OP seemed to be saying that he was upset his friendly local game store was full of people who didn't realize 4e is the new kid on the block, and called DnD only because they bought the name.
I know the history.
Do you
You mean the article written by a disgruntled ex-employee that basically accuses Vic and Lisa of killing WotC? Yeah, I've read it. And none of it makes my point any less valid or yours any more.
|
|
You mean the article written by a disgruntled ex-employee that basically accuses Vic and Lisa of killing WotC? Yeah, I've read it. And none of it makes my point any less valid or yours any more.You do know that WotC owned the name before 4th edition right? You know that they produced 3.5 right? By your logic 3.5 was only D&D because they bought the name.
WOTC, in the form of 4th edition, killed 3.5...The OP seemed to be saying that he was upset his friendly local game store was full of people who didn't realize 4e is the new kid on the block, and called DnD only because they bought the name.
I know the history.
Do you
If you don't think WoTC created 4th edition as a money grab, and you believe the way they sell books so that you need to buy them all pokemon style (pun intended) is altruistic, then you are exactly the type of customer they want.
Good job, citizen!
You mean the article written by a disgruntled ex-employee that basically accuses Vic and Lisa of killing WotC? Yeah, I've read it. And none of it makes my point any less valid or yours any more.You do know that WotC owned the name before 4th edition right? You know that they produced 3.5 right? By your logic 3.5 was only D&D because they bought the name.
WOTC, in the form of 4th edition, killed 3.5...The OP seemed to be saying that he was upset his friendly local game store was full of people who didn't realize 4e is the new kid on the block, and called DnD only because they bought the name.
I know the history.
Do you
If you don't think WoTC created 4th edition as a money grab, and you believe the way they sell books so that you need to buy them all pokemon style (pun intended) is altruistic, then you are exactly the type of customer they want.
Good job, citizen!
For what it is worth I don't think WoTC created 4e purely for money, though as a company I'm sure one of their goals is to turn a profit, because no sane person designs a business with the intent to fail. Why do they need to be villified for earning money?
You mean the article written by a disgruntled ex-employee that basically accuses Vic and Lisa of killing WotC? Yeah, I've read it. And none of it makes my point any less valid or yours any more.You do know that WotC owned the name before 4th edition right? You know that they produced 3.5 right? By your logic 3.5 was only D&D because they bought the name.
WOTC, in the form of 4th edition, killed 3.5...The OP seemed to be saying that he was upset his friendly local game store was full of people who didn't realize 4e is the new kid on the block, and called DnD only because they bought the name.
I know the history.
Do you
If you don't think WoTC created 4th edition as a money grab, and you believe the way they sell books so that you need to buy them all pokemon style (pun intended) is altruistic, then you are exactly the type of customer they want.
Good job, citizen!
First off, how do you get that out of what I said? Second off, your rant still does nothing to reinforce your original argument which was that 3.5 was D&D but 4th is not because WotC bought the name prior to releasing 3.0.
I find it amusing that the arguements that all the old-school 3rd edition and 3.5 fans are using against 4th edition are EXACTLY the arguements old-school 2nd edition fans said about 3rd edition when it came out. 4th edition isn't an inferior game to 3rd edition, they're completely different games. Just liek 3rd edition isn't inferior to 2nd edition, they're just different games. Personally, I love (and greatly miss) 2nd edition, and I used to hate 3rd edition. That was until 4th edition came out. Now, I can't stand 4th edition, and I stomache 3rd edition a little, though I think Paizo improved the game in every consievable way, but I will always miss my 2nd edition.
If you don't think WoTC created 4th edition as a money grab, and you believe the way they sell books so that you need to buy them all pokemon style (pun intended) is altruistic, then you are exactly the type of customer they want.
Good job, citizen!
RPG's historically have not been a large money-making industry. As a business model, all you need is the core books (if that) to play, everything else is just optional.
So, of course they were trying to make money, and had to find a way to beat the past problems. Did they go about it poorly, yes, but it is a business more than anything else. You have to make money to continue to be a business.
Personally I wish they would follow the Paizo example and focus on JUST campaigns, modules, and accessories. Once the core system is out, I think it is helped much more by supporting it, than trying to expand it.
|
|
Personally I wish they would follow the Paizo example and focus on JUST campaigns, modules, and accessories. Once the core system is out, I think it is helped much more by supporting it, than trying to expand it.
So you don't think Paizo should have put out the Avanded Players Guide, Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat? Those expand the core books.
|
|
For what it is worth I don't think WoTC created 4e purely for money, though as a company I'm sure one of their goals is to turn a profit, because no sane person designs a business with the intent to fail. Why do they need to be villified for earning money?
They were putting out 3 books a month, then basically said "All of your old books are invalid, now you need to buy all of these new books. We are also completely redoing all of the worlds, so you need to buy those as well.
It wasn't "We are introducing a new line". It was "Throw away your old books and buy new ones."