For thsoe of us keeping an eye on 4E...

[Philotomy Jurament]

Dear Bitter Gamemaster,

Sorry, but you are increasingly obsolete; today's players want a fair and unbiased playing field, not a petty-tyrant playing god with their carefully-constructed PCs. You're a slide-rule, and the game is evolving beyond you. Get used to the idea.

Lovingly,

WotC

P.S.: The computer is your friend. By the way, have you checked out our Digital Initiative? There's a lot of promise there -- someday soon, your games will practically run themselves!
_________________
http://www.philotomy.com
Lost City Campaign Log

[Montague]

Philotomy Jurament wrote:
Dear Bitter Gamemaster,

Sorry, but you are increasingly obsolete; today's players want a fair and unbiased playing field, not a petty-tyrant playing god with their carefully-constructed PCs. You're a slide-rule, and the game is evolving beyond you. Get used to the idea.

Lovingly,

WotC

P.S.: The computer is your friend. By the way, have you checked out our Digital Initiative? There's a lot of promise there -- someday soon, your games will practically run themselves!

Oh, you wound me good sir.

Maybe we could be called Dunsel Masters instead? (Cookie to whoever gets the reference)

[Coleston the Cavalier]

Star Trek, Original Series. Episode where the new computer M-5 is tested on the Enterprise and eventually takes it over. Commodore Wesley calls kirk a "Captain Dunsel," in a reference to a part that has no purpose.

Incidentally, doesn't Kirk talk that computer to death too?
_________________


John Adams

[Montague]

Coleston the Cavalier wrote:
Star Trek, Original Series. Episode where the new computer M-5 is tested on the Enterprise and eventually takes it over. Commodore Wesley calls kirk a "Captain Dunsel," in a reference to a part that has no purpose.

Incidentally, doesn't Kirk talk that computer to death too?

Yep. He did it again to Landru. I tried doing it in a Star Hero game and got a disruptor bolt in the face. Obviously the GM wasn't a big TOS fan...

[Breakdaddy]

Treebore, you will now know better than to ever enjoy another game besides C&C EVER AGAIN, in whole or in part, even if that game has yet to be released. *
* I suppose now is not the time to mention I plan on running a Savage Worlds game soon.

[DangerDwarf]

Breakdaddy wrote:
* I suppose now is not the time to mention I plan on running a Savage Worlds game soon.

I wish I had enough time to get another SW games on line. I think I'm just oing to quit my job and DM.GM/CK full time from here on out.

Savage Worlds Evernight plot point...

I'll get to use you some day!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Wolfram_Stout]

Hi,

Please don't get me wrong, I am not a 4e fanboy, but I am not sure that I get the utter hate for some of this stuff.

The abilities that tie down enemies. Yes, anybody in their "right" mind with go after the wizard. That is why the fighter has to develop ways to distract, enrage, or otherwise grab the attention.

As to the in-game reason for Feather me yon oaf. I see it as an inspiration type thing. By the force of his personality he gives an alley that spark he needs to wheel around and let loose another shaft.

Again, I don't want to play 4ed, and I sure as hades do not want to run it. But I like some of the stuff they are throwing out there.

And after all, no matter what they come up with lame or great, C&C automatically encompasses it within its rules, right?

Wolfram

[shane]

Again with the joking of the hating! Just a jest. Carry on.
_________________
::: Shane

::: Rational thought, not superstition

[jman5000]

the more 4e deviates from D&D, the more interested I am in trying it out ironically.

it's no longer D&D, its a different role playing/table top game. much like I tried WoD and Gurps and palladium and shadowrun games, I'd be interested in trying this "fantasy" spin.

sure, I'll always fall back to D&D/C&C, but I'm not afraid of trying something new.

Cheers,

J.

[serleran]

Quote:
but I'm not afraid of trying something new.

Nor, does disgust = fear.

Some things just are not worthy of the effort to waste time. D&D 4e, from what I am seeing so far, is such an effortless, literally, thing... but, there is hope for what I've not seen. That little thing that makes it whatever the hell it is trying to be.

[Montague]

Wolfram_Stout wrote:
Hi,

Please don't get me wrong, I am not a 4e fanboy, but I am not sure that I get the utter hate for some of this stuff.

The abilities that tie down enemies. Yes, anybody in their "right" mind with go after the wizard. That is why the fighter has to develop ways to distract, enrage, or otherwise grab the attention.

Wolfram

Because it's unimaginative, derivative, DIKU-mud style of play that can be found in any of a dozen online computer MMORPGS.

Tell me which is better:

Encounter A: The group knows the arch-devil is going to go after the wizard or cleric, so on the fighter's turn he'll activate his Generic Taunt ability to force the (super genius intelligence) arch-devil to furiously attack the fighter whilst the cleric heals him and the wizard gleefully hurls empowered, maximized, super-duperized, lightning bolts/cones of cold/magic missiles at the devil. Rinse, repeat, loot, ding, gratz!

Encounter B: The group knows the arch-devil is going to go after the wizard or cleric and have to develop a plan combined with a judicious selection of spells and magical resources to have a chance. After a harrowing battle that killed the wizard and nearly killed the cleric, the wizard is raised, treasure is gained, and tales of the epic battle are told at the inn by the bard.

What I find rather amusing is that the MMO's that these awful "aggro" mechanics are based on are moving away from so-called "tank and spank" fights in that most cutting edge epic-level bosses can't be taunted, enraged, crowd controlled or whatever. Why? Because its boring and the fan base complained. But yet 4th Ed is serving up the same boring stuff because 9 million some-odd people are playing a computer game with those mechanics in it.

[DangerDwarf]

Montague wrote:
Because it's unimaginative, derivative, DIKU-mud style of play that can be found in any of a dozen online computer MMORPGS.

And yet WotC stormtroopers won't be coming to your house and make you play it (it would be cool fighting them off though).

So, having a game you already enjoy and play makes me wonder about the visceral dislike many show. Sucky games come out all the time and I don't go rabid about it.

[Harry Joy]

Say you want to play in a 2nd Edition game. Heck, it's only been gone for seven years or so. Lots of people didn't want to switch to 3.x. Take a look around. Put up a notice in a game store. See how long it takes to get a reply.

Most people will switch. It's the nature of the beast. If you hate it, loath it, want nothing to do with it, you'd better have a group that you are mighty comfortable with, because you are gonna be stuck with them if you want to play 3.x.

[Montague]

DangerDwarf wrote:
And yet WotC stormtroopers won't be coming to your house and make you play it (it would be cool fighting them off though).

So, having a game you already enjoy and play makes me wonder about the visceral dislike many show. Sucky games come out all the time and I don't go rabid about it.

It can seem that way when you put down in writing why you don't like something, but it's more of an "eyeroll" dislike than a ZOMG KILL KILL KILL hate. I don't begrudge anyone who wants to play it. Honestly I'll probably be roped into playing it at some point, but I'll be sliding in little asides like "Y'know, Castles & Crusades does this a lot better" at every opportunity.

[Dyne]

DangerDwarf wrote:
And yet WotC stormtroopers won't be coming to your house and make you play it (it would be cool fighting them off though).

So, having a game you already enjoy and play makes me wonder about the visceral dislike many show. Sucky games come out all the time and I don't go rabid about it.

There's a difference between crappy RPG's from little companies being released, and the mammoth mother of all RPG's being turned into a worthless dung pile. I don't even really play RPG's at all anymore because of 4e; it's so much effort to find another game with another group of people to enjoy it with that I don't want to bother. I dabble a bit in online games (over SKYPE or message boards), but I doubt I will ever sit down at a table and roll dice again.

[Treebore]

I think the reason we have our issues with 3E and 4E because it made what we like disappear off the book shelves.

There is just a certain market segment that likes simple yet gets the job done. No need for over done and overly complex rules.

Much of what 3E, and likely 4E, does with rules can be done with imaginative GM's and players. All the rules should do is say, "Hey, here are the base ruels, now here are some coool things you can try doing when your comfortable with the basics."

But WOTC went away from that. At least we have C&C and the ability to htbradize in exactly waht we want or need to make our games work the way we want them to. EXACTLY the way we want them to.

I guess the current editions just help turn the general populace into puppets. Meaning they can't imagine how to do anything without having a string pulled, a button pushed, or a feat or skill listed.

Still, 4E sounds like it is going to have some cool ideas, and give mechanics with which I can twist into working how I like. Plus it would be nice to know I might even like it enough to at least play it if the opportunity comes up.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[Harry Joy]

Here are two posts, not authored by me, that I read at the Kenzer forums last month. Two posts that said about everything I can say about the coming edition, and the fallout for fans of older editions:

GMWestermyer wrote:
If we played D&D the way we play Monopoly, sure, that would work. But RPGs are social not just within the group, but within the larger gamer community. When 3e pushed out 2e, 2e players got shoved to the curve, excluded from those previous 'groups,' They lost the RPGA, Dungeon and Dragon magazine, much con space, and of course a sense of unity with the many players who went 3e...

I've already seen the backlash from 4e, and I don't even play 3e. But the new changes to the Forgotten Realms are so extreme I can't support them, and simply disliking those changes got me hounded from the FR mailing list. One bit of gamer society, a group of people I interacted with for 10 years, flushed away because I don't like the 4e changes.

Lady Sionell wrote:
When 3.0 came out, there was resistance. (I'm sure you're aware of it, so I won't belabor the point.) There were many, many hardcore 2nd ed players around who didn't want to buy new books. Yet, as weeks and months went by, 2nd ed players got pressured more and more by 3.0 players to update their game. I personally got followed around a game store for ten minutes by a guy who insisted 3.0 was the best system for RPGs ever invented. Some time many months down the road of that experience, I finally bought the books.

Not long after that, 3.5 came out. By this time, I couldn't even find a local 2nd ed game, there were no GMs for it and no players anymore. I looked for quite some time, yet here in Phoenix there just wasn't anything close enough for me to manage. Sure, there was a game on the other side of town about 50 miles away or so, but that was it. So I bought 3.5. I felt like if I ever wanted to play again, I'd have to have the game people were actually playing. I finally have(well, had, my game may be dying again)a game on a mostly regular basis again.

All I had to do was keep up with the latest rules systems to have a game. This is, for me, frustrating in the extreme. Then someone like you, Liryel, comes along and says they don't understand why I feel forced into buying a new system every time one comes out. Sure, the game company itself can't make me buy, and it's not as though my local store is taking money out of my pocket. The real issue is that other players pressure the old schoolers into buying the new system. Intentional or not, it's creating some bad blood between those who want to play older out of print games, and the younger crowd who wants to play the shiny new system.

[DangerDwarf]

Dyne wrote:
There's a difference between crappy RPG's from little companies being released, and the mammoth mother of all RPG's being turned into a worthless dung pile.

Yeah, but I've been fairly constant in my position that 4e isn't doing that. 3e already did. So I suppose thats where I differ, I see 4e as crapping on 3e, not on D&D

[DangerDwarf]

Harry Joy wrote:
Here are two posts, not authored by me, that I read at the Kenzer forums last month. Two posts that said about everything I can say about the coming edition, and the fallout for fans of older editions:

See, personally I can't agree with either of those posts. I don't play 3e. I admit to still giving it a shot on occasion, but that's has just been to see if I really hated it (ANSWER: Yeah). Irun it when *I* want to, not because that's the only why I can find game.

Even without playing 3e, I still game regularly. In fact, had I more time, I'd be gaming even more. I run AD&D, C&C, Savage Worlds (Semi-regularly) and now Rifts.

Games I have folks interested in but currently are on hold due to lack of time are:

SR4

Scion

Crimson Empire

I live out in BFE, the closest gaming shop is about 80 miles away but I'm still able to game what I want to game. So, I have problems seeing how it is that 4e will hurt my gaming.

[DangerDwarf]

jman5000 wrote:
the more 4e deviates from D&D, the more interested I am in trying it out ironically.

it's no longer D&D, its a different role playing/table top game. much like I tried WoD and Gurps and palladium and shadowrun games, I'd be interested in trying this "fantasy" spin.

sure, I'll always fall back to D&D/C&C, but I'm not afraid of trying something new.

Cheers,

J.

Hah! I freely admit I first started talking up 4e just to piss off the 3e fanboys. But somewhere along the line I too came to the conclusion that its not D&D and just another FRPG. That alone has me interested in trying it.

Will it become my game of choice? More than likely not, but I'll give it a spin like I have so many other games.

[Wolfram_Stout]

Montague wrote:
Because it's unimaginative, derivative, DIKU-mud style of play that can be found in any of a dozen online computer MMORPGS.

Tell me which is better:

Encounter A: The group knows the arch-devil is going to go after the wizard or cleric, so on the fighter's turn he'll activate his Generic Taunt ability to force the (super genius intelligence) arch-devil to furiously attack the fighter whilst the cleric heals him and the wizard gleefully hurls empowered, maximized, super-duperized, lightning bolts/cones of cold/magic missiles at the devil. Rinse, repeat, loot, ding, gratz!

Encounter B: The group knows the arch-devil is going to go after the wizard or cleric and have to develop a plan combined with a judicious selection of spells and magical resources to have a chance. After a harrowing battle that killed the wizard and nearly killed the cleric, the wizard is raised, treasure is gained, and tales of the epic battle are told at the inn by the bard.

What I find rather amusing is that the MMO's that these awful "aggro" mechanics are based on are moving away from so-called "tank and spank" fights in that most cutting edge epic-level bosses can't be taunted, enraged, crowd controlled or whatever. Why? Because its boring and the fan base complained. But yet 4th Ed is serving up the same boring stuff because 9 million some-odd people are playing a computer game with those mechanics in it.

Hi,

I certainly see your point, but I don't think that having special abilities curtails creativity. And do me, that is all these are.

See, I don't play MMORPGs never have, never will. I am just not interested. So, when I see new class features in a Pen&Paper RPG I judge it soley on that.

The generic Taunt ability to me is no more or less "unimaginative" than any spell that would do the same.

And this is the great thing about C&C. If you are playing in my game, you are under no obligation to try anything that I would allow if you don't want to. In your game, if I try something like a taunt you can either say That will not, ever ever work (if you are a good guy). Or let me roll knowing that no roll will be good enough (if you are diabolical DM). And it is all cool.

I think I phrased it far too snarky in my last post (for that I am sorry). So let me re-phrase.

C&C is my game of choice. But I like looking at the WotC stuff as a good source of optional abilities. In a sense I look at WotC as a 3rd party supplier of C&C material.

Wolfram

[moriarty777]

Funny how things end up playing out.

I got in the game in the late 80's and my first books that I bought were the initial releases of 2nd Ed core books (er... and binder). With this, I also bought an abundance of 1st Ed material since that was what was mostly available at the time. I started running a Forgotten Realms campaign and immersed myself in it. Good stuff... good times... I was a happy gamer!

However, good stuff was followed by a lot of bad stuff as we got closer to the mid-90's. They had a ridiculous publishing schedule with releases being mediocre and re-hashes at best. Forgotten Realms also suffered IMO when it was obvious it became their flagship campaign setting. I thought the Complete Guides series a great idea (at first)... but when they started to do one for EVERYTHING I found this was too much.

When I heard what happening with the release of the 3rd Edition of D&D, I was excited again ... and an early adopter. On the whole... I liked it and aspect of it I still do. It wasn't perfect either and things like Attacks of Opportunity and that Miniatures and a Battlegrid were now requirements as opposed to optional really bugged me. The deal breaker wasn't 3.5 (I agree with it though I disagree with the way they went about it), it was more reminiscent of what TSR was doing in the mid-90s.

Since 4th Ed looks to be a departure from 3rd Ed -- much in the same way that 3rd was from 2nd, I'll be taking a good look at it. I'll seriously consider picking up the core set (though the lack of Gnomes is really annoying somehow). If I do pick up the core books, I know for a fact that my investment in it will be minimal because I'm not buying into their online initiative nor do I imagine buying anything else from them.

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com