|
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.
Because there is almost nothing of the WoTC that bought TSR and created 3.0 and 3.5 left at this point.
3.0 and 3.5 came in as a "This is new, try it"
4th came in as "This is DnD, the old stuff is gone forever, you play this now!"
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
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.
I don't like the idea of a company trying to make money on their products. It sounds way too reasonable to me.
I'm of the camp that loved 2nd, loved 3rd/3.5, was put off by 4th edition and gave it a small chance before dropping it, went to Pathfinder, before going BACK to 4th and realizing I didn't try hard enough.
It's easy to let change and bitterness cloud your judgement. Hate is much easier. Plus you get cool red lightsabers. Truth be told I find 4th to have a lot less problems than 3rd/3.5/Pathfinder. It's by no means perfect but I doubt any system will be. Still, it's a lot of fun and I've slowly put down the red lightsaber. Heck even my complaints against the FR changes have halted and I've come to understand better the decision made to change it up. I'd love to try out 4th edition eberron myself but my group seems content with FR for now.
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."
I'm confused. I have my core set of 4E rules, and the group I game with have picked a few random supplements here and there. Nobody tried to force us to throw anything away and pick up something new, and nobody forced us to pick up all of the 4E add ons; we just grabbed those relevent to our interests. Changing a campaign setting doesn't mean much when you are in complete control of the game world you run in. It seems to me that most gripes can be solved with common sense. And the advent of the most recent changes of the rules is hardly any different from 3.0 -> 3.5. At least it seems like every 4E book I've flipped through has been of amazing quality. My 3.0, my 3.5, my 4E, my PF, hell even my 2EAD&D books all still function perfectly fine. And the PF Bestiary makes an excellent doorstop.
|
|
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.Because there is almost nothing of the WoTC that bought TSR and created 3.0 and 3.5 left at this point.
3.0 and 3.5 came in as a "This is new, try it"
4th came in as "This is DnD, the old stuff is gone forever, you play this now!"
<hands you a red light saber> ... good ... good ... let the hate fill you.
Seriously though, do you actually believe this? Because if so ... that's impressive.
<edited for spelling red instead of right. Hurray attention!>
And the battle begins...
We've all already lost because we've contributed, even I got sucked in and I promised myself I wouldn't. Well, no point in leaving now - in for a penny, in for a pound.
|
|
And the battle begins...
We've all already lost because we've contributed. Well, no point in leaving now.
No body lost because there is no battle. There never really is. Just arguments tossed about like a monkey with feces. Nobody loses when there's monkey feces.
... god I hope I'm not the only one that believes that.
And the battle begins...
We've all already lost because we've contributed. Well, no point in leaving now.
No body lost because there is no battle. There never really is. Just arguments tossed about like a monkey with feces. Nobody loses when there's monkey feces.
... god I hope I'm not the only one that believes that.
You get a gold star for making me smile.
|
|
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.Because there is almost nothing of the WoTC that bought TSR and created 3.0 and 3.5 left at this point.
3.0 and 3.5 came in as a "This is new, try it"
4th came in as "This is DnD, the old stuff is gone forever, you play this now!"
<hands you a red light saber> ... good ... good ... let the hate fill you.
Seriously though, do you actually believe this? Because if so ... that's impressive.
<edited for spelling red instead of right. Hurray attention!>
I'm old enough and have played long enough to go through both transitions.
TSR went bankrupt, was bought by WoTC using Magic money. 3.0 and 3.5 were attempts to jumpstart a dying game (big in the 80's, declining since...)
4th edition was very clear about no longer supporting anything from the past, and more or less saying "this is the game, suck on it and like it"
Compare the old 3.5 SRD to the 4th SRD.
Exactly.
They had to cease the old products, because it is unreasonable to try to maintain two different product lines. Just so you know, I believe almost any industry stops making the old models when they start to make the new ones.
When you are trying to support a new product that you hope will revolutionize the industry, you have to put all you can into it, even if it means losing support from the people that preferred the old product. They took a gamble and it didn't pay off a well as they had hoped.
Just like 3rd didn't support anything from 2nd?
|
|
You get a gold star for making me smile.And the battle begins...
We've all already lost because we've contributed. Well, no point in leaving now.
No body lost because there is no battle. There never really is. Just arguments tossed about like a monkey with feces. Nobody loses when there's monkey feces.
... god I hope I'm not the only one that believes that.
Misery made you smile
... that makes you sick, dude.
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.Because there is almost nothing of the WoTC that bought TSR and created 3.0 and 3.5 left at this point.
3.0 and 3.5 came in as a "This is new, try it"
4th came in as "This is DnD, the old stuff is gone forever, you play this now!"
<hands you a red light saber> ... good ... good ... let the hate fill you.
Seriously though, do you actually believe this? Because if so ... that's impressive.
<edited for spelling red instead of right. Hurray attention!>
I'm old enough and have played long enough to go through both transitions.
TSR went bankrupt, was bought by WoTC using Magic money. 3.0 and 3.5 were attempts to jumpstart a dying game (big in the 80's, declining since...)
4th edition was very clear about no longer supporting anything from the past, and more or less saying "this is the game, suck on it and like it"
Compare the old 3.5 SRD to the 4th SRD.
Exactly.
Again with the villification and implication of malintent. How dare they create and promote and support a product that they design as opposed to creation of others? Can you believe that they are actually trying to earn money in the gaming industry to advance their malicous enterprise? They even have a strong following of supporters...
Just so you know, I believe almost any industry stops making the old models when they start to make the new ones.
What, you mean nobody wants to buy a Murcury Bobcat?
|
|
I'm confused. I have my core set of 4E rules, and the group I game with have picked a few random supplements here and there. Nobody tried to force us to throw anything away and pick up something new, and nobody forced us to pick up all of the 4E add ons; we just grabbed those relevent to our interests. Changing a campaign setting doesn't mean much when you are in complete control of the game world you run in. It seems to me that most gripes can be solved with common sense. And the advent of the most recent changes of the rules is hardly any different from 3.0 -> 3.5. At least it seems like every 4E book I've flipped through has been of amazing quality. My 3.0, my 3.5, my 4E, my PF, hell even my 2EAD&D books all still function perfectly fine. And the PF Bestiary makes an excellent doorstop.
Everyone I talk to who plays 4th regularly has told me power creep is more or less built into the game. If you play with core, you are suboptimal to the supplements in a real "not just flavor" way.
And some of us are rather attached to Campaign Setting and don't like them thrown out the window just to insure you buy the "new shiny" version.
To quote the designers
"People today, the young kids today, are coming into exposure from D&D after having playing games that have very similar themes, often have very similar mechanics ... they understand the concepts of the game. So in some ways they are much more advanced as potential game players. But in other ways, they are also coming from a background that is short attention span, perhaps, less likely interested in reading the rules of the game before playing."
|
|
I'm old enough and have played long enough to go through both transitions.TSR went bankrupt, was bought by WoTC using Magic money. 3.0 and 3.5 were attempts to jumpstart a dying game (big in the 80's, declining since...)
4th edition was very clear about no longer supporting anything from the past, and more or less saying "this is the game, suck on it and like it"
Compare the old 3.5 SRD to the 4th SRD.
Exactly.
I feel like you're so close to realizing what you're saying. Like if you just took a few steps back and looked at this argument then maybe you'd see what I'm seeing.
3rd edition was not backwards compatible with 2nd edition. Nothing WotC did tried to help out 2nd edition players. It's almost as if their 4th edition mentality started with 3rd edition to 2nd edition players. "This is the game, suck on it and like it" as it were?
3rd edition was very clear about no longer supporting anything from the past.
WotC saved the D&D label and they keep trying to. Sure they might screw up a time or two but the point stands that it IS doing alright for itself, enough to keep afloat at least. This doesn't make them some sinister dude in a top hat twirling his moustache as he waits for a train to hit the girl he tied to the tracks.
|
|
They had to cease the old products, because it is unreasonable to try to maintain two different product lines. Just so you know, I believe almost any industry stops making the old models when they start to make the new ones.
When you are trying to support a new product that you hope will revolutionize the industry, you have to put all you can into it, even if it means losing support from the people that preferred the old product. They took a gamble and it didn't pay off a well as they had hoped.
Just like 3rd didn't support anything from 2nd?
3rd came out of TSR going bankrupt.
When they released Ebberon, they didn't throw out Forgotten Realms. When they released Modern, or any of the other d20 variants, they didn't throw out 3.5.
They actively sought to shut down 3.5 to force you to the new version, like it or lump it.
2nd edition died because TSR died.
3.5 was doing well, well enough that Paizo has spun off an entire successful line on it's coat tails.
They didn't see a much growth in continuing a line as they did in forcing players to start from scratch with all new books.
As Ringtail said, he's got the core stuff and supplements he likes.
Well when you stop putting out anything to support the old core books, players need to have a new set of core books for the new game.
I don't care that they put out a new edition. It was how they killed the old one while it was still successful to force people to buy the new one.
I'm confused. I have my core set of 4E rules, and the group I game with have picked a few random supplements here and there. Nobody tried to force us to throw anything away and pick up something new, and nobody forced us to pick up all of the 4E add ons; we just grabbed those relevent to our interests. Changing a campaign setting doesn't mean much when you are in complete control of the game world you run in. It seems to me that most gripes can be solved with common sense. And the advent of the most recent changes of the rules is hardly any different from 3.0 -> 3.5. At least it seems like every 4E book I've flipped through has been of amazing quality. My 3.0, my 3.5, my 4E, my PF, hell even my 2EAD&D books all still function perfectly fine. And the PF Bestiary makes an excellent doorstop.Everyone I talk to who plays 4th regularly has told me power creep is more or less built into the game. If you play with core, you are suboptimal to the supplements in a real "not just flavor" way.
And some of us are rather attached to Campaign Setting and don't like them thrown out the window just to insure you buy the "new shiny" version.
To quote the designers
"People today, the young kids today, are coming into exposure from D&D after having playing games that have very similar themes, often have very similar mechanics ... they understand the concepts of the game. So in some ways they are much more advanced as potential game players. But in other ways, they are also coming from a background that is short attention span, perhaps, less likely interested in reading the rules of the game before playing."
I've not played enough 4E to know, but powercreep happens in every system. As options increase, versitility increases. Versitility in a game that involves challenges, puzzles, and combat equates to quite a bit of power. 2E released "Player's Option" and "Complete Book of Elves", 3.X saw the "Complete" line among others, after purusing the upcoming "Ultimate" books from Paizo I'm sure I'll be able to offer up a similar argument. You can tackle the problem by limiting or altering options. Again with the campaign settings. Is it so hard to say: "Hey guys, I don't care for the newest incarnation of ________, shall we continue in the existing setting?"
|
|
Everyone I talk to who plays 4th regularly has told me power creep is more or less built into the game. If you play with core, you are suboptimal to the supplements in a real "not just flavor" way.And some of us are rather attached to Campaign Setting and don't like them thrown out the window just to insure you buy the "new shiny" version.
To quote the designers
"People today, the young kids today, are coming into exposure from D&D after having playing games that have very similar themes, often have very similar mechanics ... they understand the concepts of the game. So in some ways they are much more advanced as potential game players. But in other ways, they are also coming from a background that is short attention span, perhaps, less likely interested in reading the rules of the game before playing."
Again your stating things that don't just apply to 4th edition. The same was true in 3rd edition and the same is true in Pathfinder. If you stick with core over expanded resources, you won't be as optimized/powerful as you could be. Be it a couple of feats or build that makes your sword and shield fighter better, a means to ACTUALLY play a dex based fighter, or maybe a few new magic items or spells you're going to miss out on things.
<edit: Ringtail beat me to the point of what all I had to say. Again, Ringtail, you're too even handed for a forum. I demand you scream "It's over 9000!!" or something to stay grounded in the internetzzzz >
I'm old enough and have played long enough to go through both transitions.TSR went bankrupt, was bought by WoTC using Magic money. 3.0 and 3.5 were attempts to jumpstart a dying game (big in the 80's, declining since...)
4th edition was very clear about no longer supporting anything from the past, and more or less saying "this is the game, suck on it and like it"
Compare the old 3.5 SRD to the 4th SRD.
Exactly.
I feel like you're so close to realizing what you're saying. Like if you just took a few steps back and looked at this argument then maybe you'd see what I'm seeing.
3rd edition was not backwards compatible with 2nd edition. Nothing WotC did tried to help out 2nd edition players. It's almost as if their 4th edition mentality started with 3rd edition to 2nd edition players. "This is the game, suck on it and like it" as it were?
3rd edition was very clear about no longer supporting anything from the past.
WotC saved the D&D label and they keep trying to. Sure they might screw up a time or two but the point stands that it IS doing alright for itself, enough to keep afloat at least. This doesn't make them some sinister dude in a top hat twirling his moustache as he waits for a train to hit the girl he tied to the tracks.
Ah, but what YOU are saying, my good sir, is that WOTC screwed up not just once, but TWICE with 3.0/5 AND 4e.
WOTC's attitude to EVERYTHING is the core problem. Being a douche to potential customers doesn't sell. Which, apparently, they are JUST NOW finding out. And they have a loooong history of making these terrible mistakes.
No, I don't hate them for trying to make money. I hate them for trying to make money at the expense of the game. "Buy the new Red Box, and be waaaaaay powerful! Forget your PHB 1!" "Mystra dies again! Her worshipers begin to question her divinity!"
I liked 2E alot, too. I really only had an issue with THAC0.
I liked 2E alot, too. I really only had an issue with THAC0.
What was wrong with Thac0?
|
|
I'm old enough and have played long enough to go through both transitions.TSR went bankrupt, was bought by WoTC using Magic money. 3.0 and 3.5 were attempts to jumpstart a dying game (big in the 80's, declining since...)
4th edition was very clear about no longer supporting anything from the past, and more or less saying "this is the game, suck on it and like it"
Compare the old 3.5 SRD to the 4th SRD.
Exactly.
I feel like you're so close to realizing what you're saying. Like if you just took a few steps back and looked at this argument then maybe you'd see what I'm seeing.
3rd edition was not backwards compatible with 2nd edition. Nothing WotC did tried to help out 2nd edition players. It's almost as if their 4th edition mentality started with 3rd edition to 2nd edition players. "This is the game, suck on it and like it" as it were?
3rd edition was very clear about no longer supporting anything from the past.
WotC saved the D&D label and they keep trying to. Sure they might screw up a time or two but the point stands that it IS doing alright for itself, enough to keep afloat at least. This doesn't make them some sinister dude in a top hat twirling his moustache as he waits for a train to hit the girl he tied to the tracks.
Ah, but what YOU are saying, my good sir, is that WOTC screwed up not just once, but TWICE with 3.0/5 AND 4e.
WOTC's attitude to EVERYTHING is the core problem. Being a douche to potential customers doesn't sell. Which, apparently, they are JUST NOW finding out. And they have a loooong history of making these terrible mistakes.
No, I don't hate them for trying to make money. I hate them for trying to make money at the expense of the game. "Buy the new Red Box, and be waaaaaay powerful! Forget your PHB 1!" "Mystra dies again! Her worshipers begin to question her divinity!"
I liked 2E alot, too. I really only had an issue with THAC0.
Don't call me sir!! I demand less respect! I DEMANDS IT!
Still, as for them screwing up twice with 3.0/4/5/6/blaaaaah is all a matter of opinion. If you didn't want to switch and still had lots more money to burn, then sure. They messed with your stuff and NOBODY messes with your stuff.
However if you didnt like the old systems, or you did but are happy with the new ones, then all's well. They didn't screw up, they HELPED you. Plus since they aren't making the old system anymore they get to dedicate their manpower to the new system. Hurray for messing with your stuff!
Me personally, I'm glad it all went down the way it did. 4th edition came out and made a lot of people happy with it. It ALSO made people unhappy which allowed Paizo to grow into a very successful business for those that were all over the 3x system. More jobs were made, more books are sold, and more people are getting a window into table top roleplaying.
*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik *goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik*goik *goik*goik*
BRAPPPP
I liked 2E alot, too. I really only had an issue with THAC0.What was wrong with Thac0?
I don't know what people's problem with THAC0 was. I never had any problem figuring out what AC I hit.
I don't know what people's problem with THAC0 was. I never had any problem figuring out what AC I hit.I liked 2E alot, too. I really only had an issue with THAC0.What was wrong with Thac0?
Even our group's less mathematically inclined just drew up a quick chart. Which is why I'm confused as to what the problem was.
|
|
Even our group's less mathematically inclined just drew up a quick chart. Which is why I'm confused as to what the problem was.I don't know what people's problem with THAC0 was. I never had any problem figuring out what AC I hit.I liked 2E alot, too. I really only had an issue with THAC0.What was wrong with Thac0?
To a new player it might seem needlessly complicated, at least to what it is now where it's all simple adding. Not that they couldn't figure it out, but if you compared BAB with THAC0 I can see which is easier.
... THAC0's more fun to say though.
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.
+10,000 to this.
Seriously, all this 4E vs. PF stuff is useless venting. I play both editions with 2 different groups, so as far as I'm concerned, there is no "choose one side or the other" line drawn in the sand. Both games have strengths and both have weaknesses.
Also, people need to start realizing that there are other games out there as well. Rifts, Champions, Rolemaster, World of Darkness, Shadowrun, Earthdawn, Star Wars, etc. There is no shortage of options anywhere in the RPG industry, so just choose what you like and play it.
Live long and proper, peace on Earth, goodwill to all mankind, and all that other stuff.
Even our group's less mathematically inclined just drew up a quick chart. Which is why I'm confused as to what the problem was.I don't know what people's problem with THAC0 was. I never had any problem figuring out what AC I hit.I liked 2E alot, too. I really only had an issue with THAC0.What was wrong with Thac0?To a new player it might seem needlessly complicated, at least to what it is now where it's all simple adding. Not that they couldn't figure it out, but if you compared BAB with THAC0 I can see which is easier.
... THAC0's more fun to say though.
Thac0 sounds like the name of a great warrior. Bab was a bunny.
Point: Thac0.
I also personally find it very difficult to get angry about any of this sort of edition change stuff. I don't understand all the nerdrage at all.
WOTC created a new edition of a game that they own. They have every right to do that, and people have every right to either play it or play an earlier edition, or a different game entirely. Paizo, had every right to re-flavor 3.5 and keep it going as well.
How does any of this affect anyone? 3.5 is still around, and products are still being produced for that system.
WOTC did not kick down the door to any of your houses, grab all of your PF/3.5/2E books and burn them in a bonfire. WOTC did not kill your pets, or take your loved ones hostage and order you all to play 4E.
Is WOTC a great and wonderful, completely altruistic organization, unconcerned with mundane things such as profit? Absolutely not. Can they sometimes be douchey to their customers? Absolutely.
However, Paizo isn't exactly donating all their profits to charity either are they?
To each his/her own I say. Choose what you like, and don't condemn others for liking something different.
|
|
Even our group's less mathematically inclined just drew up a quick chart. Which is why I'm confused as to what the problem was.I don't know what people's problem with THAC0 was. I never had any problem figuring out what AC I hit.I liked 2E alot, too. I really only had an issue with THAC0.What was wrong with Thac0?To a new player it might seem needlessly complicated, at least to what it is now where it's all simple adding. Not that they couldn't figure it out, but if you compared BAB with THAC0 I can see which is easier.
... THAC0's more fun to say though.
Thac0 sounds like the name of a great warrior. Bab was a bunny.
Point: Thac0.
Yea but evil WotC came by and flushed Thac0!
Thac0 go down the hooooole.
God I miss that cartoon. Not as much as I miss animaniacs or Freakazoid but still ... <sigh> ... childhood.
Though to be fair, Thac0 doesn't sound like a great warrior. More a comic book sound effect. Right up there with SNIKT!
Yea but evil WotC came by and flushed Thac0!
Thac0 go down the hooooole.
God I miss that cartoon. Not as much as I miss animaniacs or Freakazoid but still ... <sigh> ... childhood.
Though to be fair, Thac0 doesn't sound like a great warrior. More a comic book sound effect. Right up there with SNIKT!
My roommate and I rolled through the complete series of Freakazoid again last year thanks to netflix. That theme-song is still stuck in my head.
Though to be fair, Thac0 doesn't sound like a great warrior. More a comic book sound effect. Right up there with SNIKT!
Okay, now I'm gonna create a game system where you have to figure your SKINT roll to see if you do damage. You, of course have to hit the opponents THWAP score, or if it's an area effect, they'll roll thier ZINGA save.
|
|
Okay, now I'm gonna create a game system where you have to figure your SKINT roll to see if you do damage. You, of course have to hit the opponents THWAP score, or if it's an area effect, they'll roll thier ZINGA save.Though to be fair, Thac0 doesn't sound like a great warrior. More a comic book sound effect. Right up there with SNIKT!
I'd play that.
|
|
My roommate and I rolled through the complete series of Freakazoid again last year thanks to netflix. That theme-song is still stuck in my head.Yea but evil WotC came by and flushed Thac0!
Thac0 go down the hooooole.
God I miss that cartoon. Not as much as I miss animaniacs or Freakazoid but still ... <sigh> ... childhood.
Though to be fair, Thac0 doesn't sound like a great warrior. More a comic book sound effect. Right up there with SNIKT!
That's because you and your roommate are full of unfiltered awesome.
I'd play that.Okay, now I'm gonna create a game system where you have to figure your SKINT roll to see if you do damage. You, of course have to hit the opponents THWAP score, or if it's an area effect, they'll roll thier ZINGA save.Though to be fair, Thac0 doesn't sound like a great warrior. More a comic book sound effect. Right up there with SNIKT!
I'm in, but only if I get to have the highest "KaPOW!!!"
Oh, awesome.
Ive tried and tried to hold my tounge for too bleedin long
I hardly think so.
when they see me pulling out Pathfinder books, they ask why I am not playing "Real D&D".
In a very real, very objective sense, 4e is real D&D and Pathfinder is not - D&D is a name owned, trademarked, and protected by WotC. Pathfinder is not part of the D&D brand; it can't even reference it in many cases (this is why you see Pathfinder advertised as "compatible with the 3.5 edition of the world's most popular roleplaying game").
Being upset at them for calling a spade a spade strikes me as immature.
Once I got the urge to kill under control,
This, of course, goes well beyond immature.
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.
So you responded to their imagined diss of Pathfinder with an intended (and much harsher) diss of 4e? And you felt justified in complaining about their conduct?
I explained that I fell in love with 3.5 and when WOTC killed my beloved magazines, i.e. Dungeon and Dragon magazine,
WotC didn't kill them. They moved them to a digital format and regained control of their publishing. You use the word "kill" here because it makes you feel better about the changes that took place - "kill" is an emotionally charged word that assists you in your mental envisioning of WotC as a figurative murderer. You have your bogeyman, and you're keeping it alive by giving it bogeyman traits.
I dont like the 4th edition rules and game play.
This is probably the most salient point in that entire post.
I know that every time I go to a convention I get guff about this but oh well.
Pathfinder sees a ton of convention play. I doubt you get harassed about playing Pathfinder very much. In my experience, Pathfinder fans are far more willing to attack 4e than the other way around - and this thread's existence is only more evidence in support of that.
Its not a 4th edition vs. Pathfinder issue
Yes, it obviously is, based on your posts. Or, perhaps more accurately, it's an anti-4e issue (really, it's probably more important to you that people don't play 4e than that they do play Pathfinder, and that alone says everything).
Its not an edition war at all.
Half of your OP is about how 4e/WotC ruined everything. The only way you could have made your first post more edition-warry was to include a silly dig about 4e being like WoW.
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.
This is also not good. If you wouldn't like people saying the same about Pathfinder - and trust me, plenty could - you probably shouldn't be saying it about games you don't have anything to do with.
The appropriate, polite response to someone telling you that they think 4e is great is to tell them that you're glad they've found a game that they enjoy.
Yes I do have something against 4th Edition.
Yes, we know.
A good number of people are trying to push it as the be all end all.
You mean there are people who like 4e?! I don't know if you've noticed, but there are a bajillion people here who are trying much harder to push the idea that Pathfinder is the real D&D. You just don't like it coming from 4e players because you don't agree with them. This has nothing to do with principles and everything to do with inflamed opinions.
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.
This is laughable for two reasons.
First, and most obviously, WotC never said that. Their intention was never to piss off their players. In fact, their intention was to make most of them happy. And guess what? They did! Sorry that you weren't part of the happy group, but how you reacted to the new edition was up to you.
Second, and less obviously but more importantly, Paizo very well could put out a new edition at some point and invalidate their previous mechanical (and perhaps even fluff!) content. And guess what? That wouldn't make them awful people, because that's what gaming companies have to do (historically) to stay afloat. Traditionally, sales gradually drop off over the course of an edition's life cycle, and new editions reinvigorate their revenue, allowing them to continue to produce content. Hating on WotC for publishing a new edition is tantamount to hating a game company for existing. It's silly.
WOTC, in the form of 4th edition, killed 3.5
Just like 3e killed 2e, and like 2e killed 1e, and like edition-of-choice killed other-edition-of-choice. The reality, of course, is that none of this is true. 4e replaced 3.5 as the edition currently supported and in publication. It didn't kill it. Your books are still there. The WotC ninjas didn't show up and kill all of your players. The campaigns you had put together in your heads didn't evaporate into the memory equivalent of cotton candy.
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.
No, it changed Forgotten Realms significantly and ticked off die-hard Realms fans who couldn't imagine not buying the newest setting book and just sticking with what they already had.
Of course, then WotC went on to produce 4e versions of Eberron and Dark Sun, both of which were quite good and received general acclaim (Dark Sun especially), followed almost immediately by Gamma World, which has also received stellar reviews.
So, I guess, by "urinated on all the worlds", you actually mean "pissed off some people by changing one of them".
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.
No, Pathfinder is the new kid on the block. 4e was out before Pathfinder. And 4e is called D&D because it is D&D, and is made by the people who have been making D&D for 11 years now.
And, of course, the OP was saying far more than that.
The general rant was about 4th being referenced as "real D&D".
It strikes me as silly to take exception to something that is objectively true.
Of course, that's not really the issue, though. What you actually got ticked off by was someone implying that their game is better than your game. OH LOOK A THREAD ABOUT HOW 4E SUCKS AND PATHFINDER IS BETTER, WHO COULD HAVE WRITTEN THAT?
As for specifics about the game itself alot of the tripe they pulled with the whole lets cut everyone out of the industry.
I guess we're done pretending that this isn't about 4e.
They "cut" Paizo out of their strategy, yes, by retaking control of their magazine properties. Paizo, of course, had options - among them, supporting 4e with published adventures. This may surprise you, but some people were upset that Paizo decided to go their own way! But those people got over it (and it didn't even take them three years!).
When the whole thing took off they werent taking into account their gamers or fan bases, yes this is all industry related.
Sure they were. I'm a gamer, and I'm part of their fan base. They took me (or people like me, of which there are lots and lots) into account. They didn't take you into account, or rather they did and just realized that trying to please everyone was a losing proposition.
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.
I did all those things, and it was no big deal. I finished up my campaigns naturally, and when I wanted to start a new one I started a 4e campaign. Absolutely painless.
But that is because it is much, much, less versatile.
I disagree. I can do anything with 4e, on the fly, and it will work more or less exactly as I want it to work. 4e's number one strength is its versatility.
My role playing game should be about "how can we make this happen"
That's what 4e is all about. I've played 4e a lot. I cannot take seriously anyone who tells me that 4e isn't about making things happen.
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.
I've never had a 4e combat take 4 hours. Even the very first one (in fact, the very first one, with every player and the DM new to the game, probably took about an hour or hour and a half). I cannot imagine what your group must have done to make a combat last that long. It's completely ridiculous, and given that you claim it never got better for your group, and given that I've never heard of combats consistently taking that long in 4e before - ever - I'm inclined to say that the problem had nothing to do with 4e.
Maybe they were put off by your single-minded effort to start an edition war when they had simply come to play a game?
My mouse instinctively reached for the +Rep button and then realized there wasn't one. My hand experienced an odd momentary sensation of disappointment. Kudos.
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 just inadvertently blamed the CEO of Paizo (Lisa Stevens) and Paizo's Technical Director (Vic Wertz) for WotC's current business practices!
Good job, citizen!
To sum everything up: Don't bash games you don't know and don't care about, don't get so upset with people in real life that you turn around and do exactly the same thing on the internet and don't try and blame a game or a game company for any of your problems if you're completely satisfied with the game you're already playing.
|
To sum everything up: Don't bash games you don't know and don't care about, don't get so upset with people in real life that you turn around and do exactly the same thing on the internet and don't try and blame a game or a game company for any of your problems if you're completely satisfied with the game you're already playing.
+1.
3rd came out of TSR going bankrupt.
WotC actually continued on with 2nd edition for some time. The Excellent A Paladin in Hell came out for 2nd edition while it was under WotC control and WotC did another print run of the core 2nd edition books with new covers after they acquired the IP.
@OP: Now I am not a fan of 4th ed. I probably dislike it more than you...though perhaps more rationaly...but I think you are blaming the wrong people with what happened to you.
You ever thought you could have simply put Pathfinder D&D on your sign up sheet? I mean really what if a bunch of people showed up expecting a 1st ed D&D game? And said the same thing? Would you have posted a thread called 'A general Rant against 1st ed' ?
I really think you are at fault here. Though perhaps those 4th ed fans were a little close minded...though all RPGs fans have die hard fanatics who won't give any game a chance other than their game of choice. Heck I remember running into some 3.5 fans who would not touch any other game system that was not D20...anyway.
So you ran into some jerk fans(assuming everything happened as you said it did)...so what? I mean I know alot of jerks who play 4th ed...as I know some jerks who play 3.5...or 2nd ed...or HERO...or etc. The key is not to let the jerks turn you into one of them.
Let us introduce you to Scott.
"That's Scott! He's a dick!"
-Southpark
WotC actually continued on with 2nd edition for some time. The Excellent A Paladin in Hell came out for 2nd edition while it was under WotC control and WotC did another print run of the core 2nd edition books with new covers after they acquired the IP.
3rd came out of TSR going bankrupt.
Sure, but I'm certain they started work on 3rd right away.
I too was a loyal 4th buyer for 2-3 years. But then I realized pathfinder was doing everything the fans had always asked for but we had been told was not economically practical. Like a third fiends book. And that every 4th ed class and power is pretty much a re-arranging of a few dozen jigsaw puzzle pieces. I miss healing surges and every monster doing something unique, but not enough to go back.
But Pathfinder is not D&D, no matter what it's history. Maybe if WotC continues with it's current product plan (or lack thereof) they'll give up D&D and the license will go up for sale. But at this point, I find it hard to imagine that Paizo would even buy it. I have a feeling that D&D will someday be a historical footnote to the world's most popular roleplaying game: Pathfinder.
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
I was looking forward to reading a well thought out critique of the 4e system from someone who has been playing it since its inception and has become disillusioned.
Nerds in a store acting like mindless fanboys? Spiderman > Superman? Pokemon < Magic?
You really let me down.
Let us introduce you to Scott."That's Scott! He's a dick!"
-Southpark
Hahaha my friends and I got a huge kick out of that when we watched the Canadian Christmas episode.
|
|
I too was a loyal 4th buyer for 2-3 years. But then I realized pathfinder was doing everything the fans had always asked for but we had been told was not economically practical. Like a third fiends book. And that every 4th ed class and power is pretty much a re-arranging of a few dozen jigsaw puzzle pieces. I miss healing surges and every monster doing something unique, but not enough to go back.
But Pathfinder is not D&D, no matter what it's history. Maybe if WotC continues with it's current product plan (or lack thereof) they'll give up D&D and the license will go up for sale. But at this point, I find it hard to imagine that Paizo would even buy it. I have a feeling that D&D will someday be a historical footnote to the world's most popular roleplaying game: Pathfinder.
Out of all the arguments, the idea that all classes in 4th edition do the exact same thing, just in a different way, confuses me and not because I disagree (I generally do).
... I just don't get how 3rd edition is less of a culprit of this. Heck, usually it's more.
Fighter, Rogue, Barbarian, Ranger ... basic attack. Be it charging (4th has it), sneak attacks (4th has it), Raging (4th has it) or favored enemy (4th has ... something?) ... they're still just doing basic attacks. Full round, spring attacks ... whatever you want to call it, they're basic attacks.
Wizards and Sorcs had a lot of spell options but they were from the same list. Not saying this was a bad thing ... just saying they're doing the exact same thing, just in a moderately different way.
Heck, to many classes 4th gave it more options to do different things. I understand the initial knee jerk reaction to look at 4th edition and see that "they're all doing the same thing" because I did it. However after taking a moment and looking back and forth between the two editions, I no longer see how this argument holds up and it NOT apply to 3x too. All the melee classes can do basic attacks AND something cool per encounter/day/whatever.
I know it can also be said that all the spells or abilities are just doing X damage but again, thats what most of 3rd edition was as well.
I guess I believe that some of those that hate 4th aren't completely beyond saving; not from not liking 4th (we all play what we like) but to actually become rational people when they take a step back and evaluate the situation for what it is with an even head.
... that being said, some of you are in Clockwork Orange territory.