|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even more than this, they need quality adventures, both for home games and organized play games. Most of WotC's published adventures and modules for LFR are terrible. They need more story and more roleplaying hooks than, "Here's a skill challenge so you can get another milestone." Even if 4E was a great version of D&D, you'd be hard pressed to see it if you just played their published adventures and LFR mods.
I liked all the variations of starting scenarios in 1st level 4th edition games, wait I think it was always this...
"...a wagon is overturned, goblins attack."
I mean seriously, how many times did they use that one?
I don't know, how many times did they use it?
I find comments like this funny on these boards, though; the very first Pathfinder encounters ever written involved burning wagons and a goblin attack.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I liked all the variations of starting scenarios in 1st level 4th edition games, wait I think it was always this...
"...a wagon is overturned, goblins attack."
I mean seriously, how many times did they use that one?
I don't know, how many times did they use it?
I find comments like this funny on these boards, though; the very first Pathfinder encounters ever written involved burning wagons and a goblin attack.
Secrets of slaughterstone I think? goblins attacking a caravan run by a cranky halfling, IIRC.
I liked all the variations of starting scenarios in 1st level 4th edition games, wait I think it was always this...
"...a wagon is overturned, goblins attack."
I mean seriously, how many times did they use that one?
I don't know, how many times did they use it?
I find comments like this funny on these boards, though; the very first Pathfinder encounters ever written involved burning wagons and a goblin attack.
I've never even used published modules(until Red Hand of Doom recently) and even I beat this scenario to death.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a gamer for over 30 years, I have seen a lot of changes in my hobby. When I saw that WotC had rehired Monte Cook, I thought that a new edition might be announced in the relatively near future. I thought that it might come with the D&D Experience later this month, but it was a bit sooner. I certainly did NOT expect the announcement to be as big as it was with major media coverage.
During the past week, I took time to read what information on the new system that I could and read the reaction of several people so that I could try to have an informed opinion and some idea of the concerns of others. I find myself as guardedly optimistic about the future of a new edition, yet I am not sure that I will be a part of it. Like a number of other gamers, I really did not switch over to 4E.
For myself, I now mostly play Pathfinder after trying 4E a few times. I do not hate 4E, but I did not find that it really appealed to me. My attitude has been not to condemn any edition but to realize that we all have different preferences in games.
So, I am going to share some of my thoughts. Take them for as much worth (or as little) as you see in them. I hope that I do not come across as a naysayer or a pessimist. I think that a new edition has a lot of potential but I am not sure that it will be my game.
I can understand why WotC is moving to a new edition – as there has been a lot of evidence of 4E not performing as well as they wished in sales. In addition to the various measures of sales for the industry, some store owners I know have said that 4E has been selling very slowly for some time. What surprised me greatly about the announcements about a new edition is that people from WotC such as Mike Mearls stated that there have been problems with 4E in terms of sales and that the company made many mistakes in rolling out the game. I found those admissions to be surprising and refreshing – it is rare that companies will be as frank about not meeting their goals as WotC was in many recent statements.
I began gaming with AD&D over 3 decades ago, and have played various editions of Dungeons and Dragons along with many other games. I made the transition from 1E to 2E fairly seamlessly, not missing some things as weapon speed factors and some of the other cumbersome rules of 1st Edition. (I remember players actually groaning when someone’s character decided to grapple or pummel a foe or if there was psionic combat.) I was stunned when TSR stopped publishing during their crisis and I was pleased to see that Wizards of the Coast purchased TSR and the Dungeons and Dragons game would continue.
Yet, I find myself largely neutral or mildly positive about the announcement. There is not the excitement that I felt in learning about 3rd Edition or the curiosity that I felt on hearing of the release of 4th Edition. I am curious as to what a new edition of the Dungeons and Dragons game will look like, but I am not sure that I will be doing much with that edition.
When 4th Edition came out, I was not actively gaming. I went to a few events run by local hobby shops where I lived in Phoenix but was not really part of any active gaming groups. I enjoyed parts of the game, but I found the Players Handbook to be a dull read. I found combats took too long – for several events, we ran out of time because of long combats. Also, I did not find much that appealed to me in terms of role playing and did not understand some decisions such as making tieflings and dragonborn as core races to be introduced in the Player’s Handbook. I sat in on a Pathfinder game while I was out in Phoenix and liked what I saw.
When I moved back to the Chicago area, I picked up the Pathfinder Core Rule Book and enjoyed the book and found it appealed to me in ways that 4E had not. Since that time, I have become active in a local Pathfinder Society group, playing and running events. I have not purchased anything from WotC since 2008. It is not because I disliked WotC but that 4E did not particularly appeal to me. (I did have a fun session with a friend, where there was good role playing – so I believe that you can have role playing with 4E or any rules set.)
I believe that WotC’s intentions, as stated by Mike Mearls, to reunify the base and provide something for players of all editions is a good idea. My hope is that a new edition would be successful and perhaps draw in some new people into gaming and bring some people back into our hobby. However, while I am confident that WotC has a good team of people working on the new edition, I do not think that it is likely that WotC will be the sole player in D20 based games. Over the past few years, many players have moved to other systems such as Pathfinder, Dragon Age, and Castles and Crusades. Unless a new Dungeons and Dragons edition is incredibly successful, I do not see those games fading away. I suspect the base will be divided. There will no doubt be some people who play the new edition and other games – I would not be opposed to doing so myself if it turns out that I like the new rules. It is just that I am not certain what would be enough to make me want to adopt a new set of rules in addition to one that I am playing now.
Also, from reading various threads about what people want and do not want in a game, I wonder if WotC can please so many different demands. I have read threads where people praised and criticized Vancian magic, hit points, skills and feats. While a new edition may be customizable, I am not sure if you will be able to truly satisfy someone who wants to run a 1st Edition style wizard, a 2nd Edition style cleric, a 3rd Edition style rogue and a 4th Edition style fighter all at the same table.
I do agree that one of WotC’s weaknesses has been in consistently creating great adventures – indeed Paizo and Green Ronin got a lot of praise for their work. So, I would like to see an OGL or GSL that would allow companies to be more comfortable creating third party products than happened after 4th Edition was introduced. (I am not sure if all the companies that once produced third party products for Dungeons and Dragons would want to do so. For the past few years, several have been working with their own gaming systems.)
So, I think that there is a lot of potential in the new edition. I think that the marketing of the new edition, complete with stories from CNN, Forbes and the New York Times, is better than some of what I saw during the transition to 4E. I am not sure how I will feel about a new system until I learn more – not just from web sites and interviews but from people I know. So, I am going to hope that WotC creates a game that is successful – which I believe would be good for our hobby – and can satisfy a very diverse group of gamers while bringing some new people into gaming.
I would hope that we can talk about all issues related to the new edition with respect. Regardless of what we play, we all have a love of our hobby. We have more in common, I suspect, than many of the critics of any edition or rules system may initially think.
Ultimately, I think that we are united by a love of gaming, of bringing people together and using our imaginations to have some fun. So, regardless of what you play or what you think of the new edition, I hope that we will respect each other and take some joy that we all enjoy role playing games. To outsiders, edition wars must seem a bit absurd -- kind of how I might view an argument about a sport where I neither know the rules or care about the game.
I've never even used published modules(until Red Hand of Doom recently) and even I beat this scenario to death.I liked all the variations of starting scenarios in 1st level 4th edition games, wait I think it was always this...
"...a wagon is overturned, goblins attack."
I mean seriously, how many times did they use that one?
I don't know, how many times did they use it?
I find comments like this funny on these boards, though; the very first Pathfinder encounters ever written involved burning wagons and a goblin attack.
Then it's time for you to pull off the wagon is overturned, goblins appear out of the woods asking "Ya need help?" ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then it's time for you to pull off the wagon is overturned, goblins appear out of the woods asking "Ya need help?" ;)I've never even used published modules(until Red Hand of Doom recently) and even I beat this scenario to death.I liked all the variations of starting scenarios in 1st level 4th edition games, wait I think it was always this...
"...a wagon is overturned, goblins attack."
I mean seriously, how many times did they use that one?
I don't know, how many times did they use it?
I find comments like this funny on these boards, though; the very first Pathfinder encounters ever written involved burning wagons and a goblin attack.
Although, I did have a variant once when I ran Ravenloft where the wagon was overturned by zombies, who were eating the wagons occupants. The players(1st-2nd level) arrived on the scene, one was playing a easily frightened bard, and when prompted for a Horror Save, he rolled a natural 1 and dropped from a heart attack. The cleric was able to revive him, but it was pretty funny when it happened.
No, I wasn't going to kill the PC from a fumbled Horror Save that early in the game. Just dropped him to negative HP. He was standing next to a healer when it happened.
I've just read the news regarding the development of 5Ed. A lot of the posters on these boards have been correctly predicting the rapid demise of 4Ed for a long time. I've enjoyed reading posts by the 4ed Die hards who defended 4Ed to their dying breaths, now having to eat crow. It is amazing to me, that in only 3.5 years since the 4.0 PH, DMG & MM were released in the summer of 2008, WoTC is already planning their next release.
And WoTC expect all of you to hop right along and re-buy the same books you've been shelling out HUNDREDS of dollars over the last 3.5 years for 4th edition, after they've finally admitted they messed up. That's funny.
I liked the fact that the New York Times article pointed to WoTC finally having to Eat some Humble Pie. The author of the NYT article states:
"And Dungeons & Dragons’ designers are also planning to undertake an exceedingly rare effort for the gaming industry over the next few months: asking hundreds of thousands of fans to tell them how exactly they should reboot the franchise."
A WoTC employee stated: “We want to take that idea of the players crafting that experience to the next level and say: ‘Help us craft the rules. Help us craft how this game is played.’ ”
WOW. That's what Paizo did several years ago when WoTC DIDN'T want to involve the players. My how time changes things.
As the author of this article is likely not a player of the game with a detailed knowledge of the recent history of the game, this translates into "WoTC clearly alienated its base, translating into lousy sales and threatening the game's continuity; and NOW they're crawling back to the players they burned and asking for their feedback."
So give it to them folks; if you even still care to. With Paizo here, you have a better option to stick with. What then is the need to take yet another multi-hundred dollar venture with a company who puts out lousy products and counts on their loyal fan base to continue to purchase products they don't want, and had no input on their design.
4Ed showed us that WoTC didn't listen to their fan base, and apparently learned nothing from 3.5 ed, an edition which inundated players with SO MANY books, that the game quickly became saturated with too much watered-down product. WoTC has learned nothing and done the same thing in 4th edition, and RUN THE GAME INTO THE GROUND in only 3.5 years. That's something. WoTC give the appearance of trying to learn from their mistakes and eating a little Humble Pie. Let us sincerely hope that they actually listen to their audience this time around.
Well considering 3ed only got 3 years and 3.5 only got 5 years, the fact that 4ed only got 4-5 years (2008-201?) isn't that big of a deal. I mean, by time the new edition comes out, it will have been out probably as long as 3.5 was. Funny how people don't remember 3.5 being a brief flame out.
|
|
Congratulations Killer-GM. Not only is the your post a rant. Not only does it include a cheapshot at 4E players. Your telling us to contribute feedback to 5e yet at the same time calling us foolish for doing so. Since even before work on 5E has even begun your sure that they will not listen. Then gamers wonder why they still don't get taken seriously. I wonder why.
|
|
Well considering 3ed only got 3 years and 3.5 only got 5 years, the fact that 4ed only got 4-5 years (2008-201?) isn't that big of a deal. I mean, by time the new edition comes out, it will have been out probably as long as 3.5 was. Funny how people don't remember 3.5 being a brief flame out.
In all honesty, d20 is still relatively young in all respects. It's only been a dozen years so far. I wish everyone would keep that perspective in mind too. There could be a whole new system arriving for all we know.
To be fair Stud, a dozen years isn't all that young at this point.
By no means that old either, but y'know..
Does anyone have an opinion on what the "ideal" lifespan of a system is? My first thought was that there isn't one and if a system is working theres no need to revise it.
However, in thinking about it further (within the context of an expanding system with more and more options becoming available) - I can rarely stick with a system beyond five years. I'm relatively happy if a system begins winding down after that time. PF might break that mold (since I've subscribed since the beginning) however as the rules become larger and larger, I find myself wishing for something easier to keep in my head.
An intuitive character builder goes along way to mitigating that, of course.
I've enjoyed reading posts by the 4ed Die hards who defended 4Ed to their dying breaths, now having to eat crow.
If this is crow I'm eating, I really ought to order it more often.
Once again, the people with the most radical opinions about the announcement of 5e are the people who don't even like 4e or WotC. The people who actually play 4e, the ones who actually might have a legitimate reason to complain about a new edition? They're generally cool with it.
Go pitch your senseless ranting - against 4e, WotC, and anyone who likes a game that you don't like - elsewhere.
Does anyone have an opinion on what the "ideal" lifespan of a system is?
I care less about the amount of time that a system was supported for, and more about the depth of material we receive over the course of its lifespan. Even though 4e has only been out for less than four years, it already has a tremendous amount of material. If I planned on sticking with 4e (I'm planning on switching to 5e, but if), I would have everything I ever need to run 4e games with a fantastic amount of variety for the rest of my life.
The only other consideration would be continued access to the digital tools, which we've heard (preliminarily) will still be available.
|
I've just read the news regarding the development of 5Ed. A lot of the posters on these boards have been correctly predicting the rapid demise of 4Ed for a long time. I've enjoyed reading posts by the 4ed Die hards who defended 4Ed to their dying breaths, now having to eat crow. It is amazing to me, that in only 3.5 years since the 4.0 PH, DMG & MM were released in the summer of 2008, WoTC is already planning their next release.
..........
When I ask my friends, do you know what Pathfinder is? Answer, NO.
But do you know what DnD is? Answer: Yes.DnD is the reason why I started table-top RPG. Its name is recognized and remembered by almost everyone.
Now that DnD is trying to get back on track, why are you ranting against it?
As player and DMs, we should be trying to help righten the game that spawned Pathfinder and inspired so many other games/systems.
I have got dismissive replies when posting threads, in certain forums, to discusses the differences people have over 3.xx ed vs 4 ed.
Some people will always prefer 4ed, some will cry remembering how great 3.5 games are and others will swear by Pathfinder.
Peoples opinions will always differ. But that does not means we should be dismissive of each others opinions. Those that love any one system have their reasons for loving it. Don't just call them die-hards and cast their thoughts aside. Read why they are defending it and try to understand.
I've just read the news regarding the development of 5Ed. A lot of the posters on these boards have been correctly predicting the rapid demise of 4Ed for a long time. I've enjoyed reading posts by the 4ed Die hards who defended 4Ed to their dying breaths, now having to eat crow. It is amazing to me, that in only 3.5 years since the 4.0 PH, DMG & MM were released in the summer of 2008, WoTC is already planning their next release.
And WoTC expect all of you to hop right along and re-buy the same books you've been shelling out HUNDREDS of dollars over the last 3.5 years for 4th edition, after they've finally admitted they messed up. That's funny.
You're right many of us have been correctly predicting an early bath for 4e here for some time now. I don't know which boards you've been reading though GM, I don't see a lot of acceptance 4e in fact has even been a failure from our opposing posters. Wotc have sorta conceded they made mistakes with 4e, but I've yet to see a clear admission of precisely which mistakes they believe they made. The crows are still in the air imo. ;-)
People will buy 5e, that's clear. The big question, which is nowhere near as open and shut as some here would have you believe, is how many. Will 5e draw in enough of those who were turned off by 4e. That's the big question and way too early to call yet. Heck, miracles can happen, maybe 5e will reverse the errors of 4e. Certainly many people (mainly people who post pro-4e as far as I can see) are ready to canonise wotc for the smallest conciliatory decision and act, so perhaps once 4e is well and truly in the ground all will be forgiven, I doubt it personally, but it is possible.
I've enjoyed reading posts by the 4ed Die hards who defended 4Ed to their dying breaths, now having to eat crow.If this is crow I'm eating, I really ought to order it more often.
Once again, the people with the most radical opinions about the announcement of 5e are the people who don't even like 4e or WotC. The people who actually play 4e, the ones who actually might have a legitimate reason to complain about a new edition? They're generally cool with it.
Go pitch your senseless ranting - against 4e, WotC, and anyone who likes a game that you don't like - elsewhere.
That's cute Betts how you attempt to marginalize my statements by using the terms "radical opinions" and "senseless rantings." Actually, I think a fair number of 4Ed players ARE asking themselves the question 'why did I just shell out hundreds of dollars for an edition that lasted less time then the two editions that it succeeded, and claimed to improve upon. You seem to think that you speak for all 4ed players. Actually, you really Only speak for the 'Die-Hards' who will defend anything WoTC does, no matter how egregious.
I've played this game since 1982. I have no issue with WoTC in principal, though I disagree with their business model of releasing endless splat books that water down the system causing these 3-4 year system upgrades (1 & 2ed were 10 years a piece). They saved the game when TSR ran it into the ground, post Gygax control. I'm all for them doing well. D&D clearly rebounded with the advent of 3.0, and 3.5 was a continuation of that. WoTC DID take the game down the wrong direction with the advent of 4.0. And they did it knowing they didn't have popular support amongst many in the community. They didn't care, and they didn't try to adequately address that. Now they're crawling back to the table to try and get it right. Good for them. I wish them well. With Paizo and Pathfinder, frankly, I'm indifferent to what WoTc does now, because Paizo already has a superior product. And I'm above all, Objective; which you are clearly not. So why don't you take your own advice to me, and do us all a favor by taking your never ending, pro WoTC rantings elsewhere.
Congratulations Killer-GM. Not only is the your post a rant. Not only does it include a cheapshot at 4E players. Your telling us to contribute feedback to 5e yet at the same time calling us foolish for doing so. Since even before work on 5E has even begun your sure that they will not listen. Then gamers wonder why they still don't get taken seriously. I wonder why.
You're correct that the tone of my statement you referenced did carry this undertone. I think you 4Ed players (and 3.5/Pathfinder players who wish to) should tell WoTC how you think the game should be structured. Paizo did this several years ago, and now has the BEST fantasy RPG available as a result, and is undoubtedly a main factor in why WoTC is in trouble. I have my doubts that WoTc will get it right (which I implied by my previous statement that you correctly identified), but for the sake of those who would play 5Ed, I hope your friends at WoTC get it right.
Does anyone have an opinion on what the "ideal" lifespan of a system is?I care less about the amount of time that a system was supported for, and more about the depth of material we receive over the course of its lifespan. Even though 4e has only been out for less than four years, it already has a tremendous amount of material. If I planned on sticking with 4e (I'm planning on switching to 5e, but if), I would have everything I ever need to run 4e games with a fantastic amount of variety for the rest of my life.
The only other consideration would be continued access to the digital tools, which we've heard (preliminarily) will still be available.
Interesting Betts. You're already dropping the system you've praised litteraly daily on these boards every since it arrived, for 5ED. If 4Ed was that great of a system, as you've suggested so often, why not stick with it? Then you wouldn't have to re-buy all those books you've already shelled out your hard earned dollars for in the 4Ed system?
|
|
Well considering 3ed only got 3 years and 3.5 only got 5 years, the fact that 4ed only got 4-5 years (2008-201?) isn't that big of a deal. I mean, by time the new edition comes out, it will have been out probably as long as 3.5 was. Funny how people don't remember 3.5 being a brief flame out.
In fairness, 3.5 wasn't incompatible with 3.0. You could (and I would) argue that 3.0 to 3.5 was one continuous evolution lasting betwen 7 and 8 years.
I would further argue that Pathfinder is another evolution, making the 3.0 to 3.5 to Pathfinder a 12 year run so far.
Which kind of kills the whole "We need new to be profitable" since Paizo has been outselling them the last two quarters.
An evolution of a product is one thing, a re-write that makes the previous unusable is another. The Beginner box has different rules than the core, but they are compatible. This kind of thing may be what they are talking about with regards to modularity.
The problem I have with WoTC's model is that they are going to have to do new every few years because they make money on rules and not modules. And they will continue to have this problem as long as they are GSL over OGL because the freelance talent will always prefer to write for a game that they can one day self publish successfully under.
I also suspect this "open" playtest will actually turn out to be a "subcribers to our online service with tons of legal threats if you share...etc...etc" playtest, making it a money grab.
We shall see.
Interesting Betts. You're already dropping the system you've praised litteraly daily on these boards every since it arrived, for 5ED. If it was that great of a system as you've suggested so often, why not stick with it, and not re-buy all those books you've shelled out your hard earned dollars for in a 5Ed system?Does anyone have an opinion on what the "ideal" lifespan of a system is?I care less about the amount of time that a system was supported for, and more about the depth of material we receive over the course of its lifespan. Even though 4e has only been out for less than four years, it already has a tremendous amount of material. If I planned on sticking with 4e (I'm planning on switching to 5e, but if), I would have everything I ever need to run 4e games with a fantastic amount of variety for the rest of my life.
The only other consideration would be continued access to the digital tools, which we've heard (preliminarily) will still be available.
I'm not Scott, but I'll be upgrading (I expect) even though 4E is the game I've found which suits me best so far. Why not? I think there's a pretty good chance the next edition will be even better. It will also mean I can use any DDI material (which I suspect is going to continue to grow in importance).
|
Which kind of kills the whole "We need new to be profitable" since Paizo has been outselling them the last two quarters.
I'd like to point out that those numbers are, to the best of my knowledge, solely based on sales of print products from selected locations. Since WotC has gone to supporting it's game mostly through online releases over the past year or so, those numbers are most likely NOT a good indicator of the ACTUAL sales/number of players.
|
|
I've enjoyed reading posts by the 4ed Die hards who defended 4Ed to their dying breaths, now having to eat crow.If this is crow I'm eating, I really ought to order it more often.
Once again, the people with the most radical opinions about the announcement of 5e are the people who don't even like 4e or WotC. The people who actually play 4e, the ones who actually might have a legitimate reason to complain about a new edition? They're generally cool with it.
Go pitch your senseless ranting - against 4e, WotC, and anyone who likes a game that you don't like - elsewhere.
Lowered expectations lead to lowered complaints. WoTC hits you because they love you Scott, they didn't mean it, you just ran into a doorknob because you are so clumsy...we get it...
I will, however give you full credit for showing up, taking your lumps, and being consistent. Where is Mr "DnD is DnD's only competition" Prof. Cirno?
On topic, this issue has always been about how WoTC released 4E more than about the game itself. Many of us view the game in the same way we view something like White Wolf. We think it isn't very good, but if it has it's niche, have fun.
But the problem came when at the same time WoTC tried to kill the game we did like by telling anyone who wanted to write for 4E they had to write for 4E exclusively if they wanted to write content.
If Paizo hadn't done Pathfinder, we would have lost the game we loved in a WoTC money grab. That wasn't the case with any prior editions, it is what we got mad about, it is the issue most of us have with WoTC. It is a legitimate complaint, even if it doesn't bother you that the same thing seems to be happening to a system you like a great deal.
Good luck finding 4E players in about 2 years.
|
|
Which kind of kills the whole "We need new to be profitable" since Paizo has been outselling them the last two quarters.I'd like to point out that those numbers are, to the best of my knowledge, solely based on sales of print products from selected locations. Since WotC has gone to supporting it's game mostly through online releases over the past year or so, those numbers are most likely NOT a good indicator of the ACTUAL sales/number of players.
If the business model was working, they wouldn't be going through an expensive overhaul.
The fact that a company made up largely of a section of a part of their business they sold off is even competitive with them demonstrates a major problem.
As I said before, and will say again, WoTC had every advantage in 2008 and no real competition. In 5 short years they have squandered that.
Just a quick note: Not everyone gets pissed off by "having" to rebuy books. At least I don't. I'd happily buy a cleaned-up CRB, for example. Heck, I gave my first printing to a friend and bought the third printing when it comes out. Then again, I generally don't buy most of the subsequent books, so buying a new set of core books every few years is not big deal -- I generally like seeing what they've come up with.
|
I try to keep in mind that LFR is not the same as WOTC. I play a lot of LFR. Lots of the mods are...lacking.
That being said, what published adventures are you even talking about. What did they have, like, 11? And they haven't had the sales they wanted. Huh.
I just don't think it's rocket science. "Captain, we're not making as many sales of our books as we'd like." "Make more books, then." Really? I know everyone thinks TSR was run by idiots (I don't), but we had fewer books to purchase and LOT more modules, which I loved. Why did WOTC abandon this? Did they really think they'd make more money as a subscription-based company?
Which kind of kills the whole "We need new to be profitable" since Paizo has been outselling them the last two quarters.
Yeah, it's not like anyone (whose site also functions as an online game store) changed the game rules just enough that it made people wanting to continue to play the new products, abandon their old core game books in order to play it, thus following the whole "we need new to be profitable" philosophy.
If 4Ed was that great of a system, as you've suggested so often, why not stick with it? Then you wouldn't have to re-buy all those books you've already shelled out your hard earned dollars for in the 4Ed system?
Well, for myself, I will say that I much prefer 3.5 (not PF, 3.5) than any of the other systems. On the other hand, I am seriously considering the reprinting of the 1ed AD&D that WotC is going to do. Because I think it is a better system than 3.5? Nope.
I try to keep in mind that LFR is not the same as WOTC. I play a lot of LFR. Lots of the mods are...lacking.
That being said, what published adventures are you even talking about. What did they have, like, 11? And they haven't had the sales they wanted. Huh.
Most of their adventures are published in dungeon. The problem isn't quantity, it's quality.
That's cute Betts how you attempt to marginalize my statements by using the terms "radical opinions" and "senseless rantings."
You began your posts here by marginalizing the opinions of those who like 4e, so I'm not exactly wracked with guilt.
Actually, I think a fair number of 4Ed players ARE asking themselves the question 'why did I just shell out hundreds of dollars for an edition that lasted less time then the two editions that it succeeded, and claimed to improve upon. You seem to think that you speak for all 4ed players. Actually, you really Only speak for the 'Die-Hards' who will defend anything WoTC does, no matter how egregious.
I've been watching the reactions online, and - at least here and at EN World - the strongest reactions against 5e are from people who don't even like 4e.
Interesting Betts. You're already dropping the system you've praised litteraly daily on these boards every since it arrived, for 5ED. If 4Ed was that great of a system, as you've suggested so often, why not stick with it? Then you wouldn't have to re-buy all those books you've already shelled out your hard earned dollars for in the 4Ed system?
First, I'll be switching because I tend to prefer supported systems to unsupported systems. I'll also be switching because the game will probably be even better than 4e. Just because I like it doesn't mean I don't think it can be improved.
As for re-buying books, they're cheap. I didn't spend more than a couple hundred dollars on books over the course of coming up on four years. And really, why would I complain about the opportunity to own more books? Books are awesome.
WoTC hits you because they love you Scott, they didn't mean it, you just ran into a doorknob because you are so clumsy...we get it...
LOL! Good one. :-)
I'm not Scott, but I'll be upgrading (I expect) even though 4E is the game I've found which suits me best so far. Why not? I think there's a pretty good chance the next edition will be even better. It will also mean I can use any DDI material (which I suspect is going to continue to grow in importance).Interesting Betts. You're already dropping the system you've praised litteraly daily on these boards every since it arrived, for 5ED. If it was that great of a system as you've suggested so often, why not stick with it, and not re-buy all those books you've shelled out your hard earned dollars for in a 5Ed system?Does anyone have an opinion on what the "ideal" lifespan of a system is?I care less about the amount of time that a system was supported for, and more about the depth of material we receive over the course of its lifespan. Even though 4e has only been out for less than four years, it already has a tremendous amount of material. If I planned on sticking with 4e (I'm planning on switching to 5e, but if), I would have everything I ever need to run 4e games with a fantastic amount of variety for the rest of my life.
The only other consideration would be continued access to the digital tools, which we've heard (preliminarily) will still be available.
How exactly is there 'a very good chance' 5e will be better for you than 4e?
The previous edition (4e) has apparently come to be regarded as worse than it's predecessor by something like 50% of it's previous audience/customer base. Those seem like pretty poor and shakey odds based on past history to me. You liked 4e ... you may not like 5e. Unless you're saying 'I'll like it whatever' ... which is madness if you ask me.
How exactly is there 'a very good chance' 5e will be better for you than 4e?
The previous edition (4e) has apparently come to be regarded as worse than it's predecessor by something like 50% of it's previous audience/customer base. Those seem like pretty poor and shakey odds based on past history to me. You liked 4e ... you may not like 5e. Unless you're saying 'I'll like it whatever' ... which is madness if you ask me.
Perhaps Scott doesn't really care what "50%" of the audience thinks. Maybe, just maybe, some of us don't seek validation in the opinions of others.
Let's look at what Scott said:
1. Scott liked the changes from 3.5E->4E.
2. Scott expects to like the changes from 4E->5E, too.
Yeah, that sounds like madness to me...
Also, the word "past" in the phrase "past history" is redundant. Normally I wouldn't mention it, but messing up ninth-grade grammar undermines your aura of smugness.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting Betts. You're already dropping the system you've praised litteraly daily on these boards every since it arrived, for 5ED. If 4Ed was that great of a system, as you've suggested so often, why not stick with it? Then you wouldn't have to re-buy all those books you've already shelled out your hard earned dollars for in the 4Ed system?First, I'll be switching because I tend to prefer supported systems to unsupported systems. I'll also be switching because the game will probably be even better than 4e. Just because I like it doesn't mean I don't think it can be improved.
As for re-buying books, they're cheap. I didn't spend more than a couple hundred dollars on books over the course of coming up on four years. And really, why would I complain about the opportunity to own more books? Books are awesome.
For $200 dollars, I can (and probably have) taken my wife to the movies ~10 times for ~20 hours worth of entertainment. Or I can spend $200 on RPG books that will keep myself and a party of 4 entertained for over a hundred hours of enjoyment per year. Our hobby is cheap guys. That said, I probably shouldn't tally up how much I spend a year on RPGs.
I agree with Scott — books are awesome.
|
|
I try to keep in mind that LFR is not the same as WOTC. I play a lot of LFR. Lots of the mods are...lacking.
That being said, what published adventures are you even talking about. What did they have, like, 11? And they haven't had the sales they wanted. Huh.
I just don't think it's rocket science. "Captain, we're not making as many sales of our books as we'd like." "Make more books, then." Really? I know everyone thinks TSR was run by idiots (I don't), but we had fewer books to purchase and LOT more modules, which I loved. Why did WOTC abandon this? Did they really think they'd make more money as a subscription-based company?
TSR was run by idiots. There is no argument here. Lorraine Williams was a horrible, horrible thing to happen to the hobby, as were the Blumes.
Sorry. Think they weren't all you want, but it doesn't change the fact they ran the biggest thing going into the ground.
I'm not Scott, but I'll be upgrading (I expect) even though 4E is the game I've found which suits me best so far. Why not? I think there's a pretty good chance the next edition will be even better. It will also mean I can use any DDI material (which I suspect is going to continue to grow in importance).How exactly is there 'a very good chance' 5e will be better for you than 4e?
The previous edition (4e) has apparently come to be regarded as worse than it's predecessor by something like 50% of it's previous audience/customer base. Those seem like pretty poor and shakey odds based on past history to me. You liked 4e ... you may not like 5e. Unless you're saying 'I'll like it whatever' ... which is madness if you ask me.
There's a pretty good chance since WoTC have great resources, great designers, great incentive to make it a successful game and they seem to have a philosophy of game design which suits me.
I don't share the views of those who don't like 4E (no matter how many of them there are).
|
|
[Perhaps Scott doesn't really care what "50%" of the audience thinks. Maybe, just maybe, some of us don't seek validation in the opinions of others.
Agreed and seconded. If I listened to every well spoken rgument or gamer rant I heard about rpgs I would never be buying anything. Some of us don't have to folloow the herd to get somewhere or buy something. Espcially gamers who sometimes don't even read a product and heard from some guy who shot another guy who ran over some other guy that rpg XYZ sucks. If I listened to every "Hero system requires a PHD in physics to use" I would have never bought let alone learned the system.
|
|
You know what I care about? I care about what my friends think. It takes a bit more consensus to get them all to agree on a game. Thankfully, we have all agreed on Pathfinder for now.
But you know what else? I know people who refuse to play 4e just because they're afraid they'll like it... even though it is the better system for their style of play. They love Rot3K style combats, and nothing says that like swarms of minions.
They also refuse to play Pathfinder because they're afraid they'll like it. Even though there is the PRD that makes it essentially free to play, they won't give it a try because they're afraid to move on to something besides 3.5, and the only reason they moved to 3.5 was because I bought the books and it is what I decided to run with the rest of the group that wanted to play it.
Honestly, these same few people (who I won't actually call friends due to troubles in the past) would never want to try 5e or D&D next or whatever they're calling it right now. You know why? Simply put: fear.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, these same few people (who I won't actually call friends due to troubles in the past) would never want to try 5e or D&D next or whatever they're calling it right now. You know why? Simply put: fear...
...is the sales-killer. Fear is the little-death that causes total bankruptcy. *ahem* Sorry, been reading Dune.
Anyway, I neatly killed another 5e thread by saying this so I'll say it again. I love 4e, and I hope I hate 5e. Not because I have some kind of grudge, but because I'm ready to step off the treadmill. So I hope 5e has all the little things that irritate me about previous editions, because that'd make my choice all the easier. :)