|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 3:34PM
#241
|
|
|
My best memory was when he invented the term "Passive Perception".
That was a fun day! =;0)
Maybe that ties in with his "differences" with the company.
"Monte, we've told you, we're having everyone play every edition of D&D. You still haven't played 4e. You have to play 4e. You know what, yes, your job does depend on it now. It's the entire spirit of the project."
(I kid, I kid)
Honestly... I think this might have contributed. I mean... Passive Perception, c'mon... that man was supposed to unite the fanbases and (seemingly) blatantly ignores one large part of it? Sat wrong with me...
Personally I agree with a few others: On a design-level I am happy to see him gone from 5E. All the ideas he espoused (and which I have seen) seemed like bad ideas to me. Also nothing against the man on a personal level, I don't know him and likely never will.
If you have questions about 4th Edition - don't hesitate to ask me via PMs. Join the Community Monster Manual Group and help to collect a mass of monsters which will make your life as DM easier, and your life as Player pure hell!  I am a cartographer. You can find some of my maps in my profile, free for non-commercial use. Also, if you happen to like maps or make them yourselves, join into the Cartographers Group!
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 3:34PM
#242
|
Date Joined:
Apr 27, 2012
|
I'm down about it because I do think Monte is a great designer and would have added to the game. But I am going to look at the playtest. I would love to know if there was a design dispute what that dispute was. It would help a lot. If it's one of my deal breakers than I could just move on as Monte has done. I guess I'll just have to wait and see as I suppose we all are doing. If it was business or something besides design then I wouldn't feel as bad or take it as big a negative. My gut tells me though it was a design issue. But that is just an intuitive feeling I have no proof.
Until Monte is ready to talk about it why bother even speculating?
Instinctual gut reactions are hardly thoughtful analysis. I have no data so all I have is an emotional gut reaction. I think a lot of Monte and I'm figuring if he had a dispute with someone at WOTC then I'm probably going to side with him. Thus the gut reaction.
Edit: I'm assuming WOTC or Monte talks right? Either could talk. I seriously doubt Monte ever will publicly.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 3:34PM
#243
|
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Hero Artisan Gold Medalist
Date Joined:
Dec 18, 2004
|
Until Monte is ready to talk about it why bother even speculating?
1) Because of NDA, he probably can't talk about it.
2) Monte Cook brought a degree of 'Street Cred' to a segment of the gaming community WoTC was trying to win back and who they need some of if they want to keep Hasbro happy. His departure, rightly or not (and I think somewhat rightly) WILL be read as a sign that 5e is going down the wrong track, has not learned anything etc. This makes the longterm chances for success of 5e less likely. A whole segment of fans who were willing to give 5e a look just went back to being paizo customers, which because of this desicion, is looking more and more like the future of gaming.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 4:00PM
#244
|
|
|
"Monte, we've told you, we're having everyone play every edition of D&D. You still haven't played 4e. You have to play 4e. You know what, yes, your job does depend on it now. It's the entire spirit of the project."
(I kid, I kid)
Aww, Mom! Do I have too?
Pro DnD Member of the Axis of Awesome Fighters: Using socks to kill monsters since 2012 DnD Next: Now with more then 4 minutes of Roleplay per gaming hour Spoiler:
Show
"If you can't make an interesting human fighter, then you aren't ready to play anything else yet" Edymnion
"The idea of resting up between encounters to fill-up on hit points and spells struck my meta-gaming nine-year-old as a distinct possibility. "Are you mad?" says my seven-year-old "This place is full of monsters!" "jamesgrahamuk
All characters have a story. Spoiler:
Show
Sometimes that story is short and sometimes it is long. They can be tragic, comic or absurd. Some teach. Some are just to fill the empty spaces in our lives. Rarely it is a transcendent fugue only half remembered but wondered at. And frequently: "it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." -William Shakespeare
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 4:35PM
#245
|
|
|
Whether or not you agree with his desgn approach it is never a good sign when the creative lead leaves because of non-creative brass input. I can't see him leaving because of planned busines model... unless it was something bizarre like basing it on mobile apps and micro transactions.
As for bad ideas... yeah he had a few. I think he had a few good ones too. I've said it before... people that can throw out a lot of ideas are important to any creative process but they need good editing. I think he was using is L&L articles as a sounding board... so you really shouldn't take everything you read in them as final rules concepts. I know what it is like to be on the recieving end of a barrage of ideas and it can be a... grueling process. I've had to put up with a lot of junk to find a few unpolished gems. Personally I wouldn't let the public see the rubbish at all. Basically what I'm saying is tat that there are always warts in the design process and I think they let us see too many of them. Warts that we didn't need to see. Warts that give us a worse impression than we needed.
Personally I'm not keen on the idea of attributes for everything, no defined skills and auto success. But I'm pretty sure all of that is going to be in the playtest material (judging from what has been said during panels concerning con playtests.) Will that magically vanish now that Monte is gone? I expect it will take a little more than that.
On the whole I didn't disaprove of Monte Cook. 3ed wasn't perfect by a long shot but I prefered it to... some other editions. So to me he represented a move in the right direction.
I'm curious to see who takes over his position... and who else may join the team... and if it is one and the same.
Of course I wish Monte the best of luck and trust that he had good reasons for his decision... which isn't something that bodes well for the game IMHO.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 5:59PM
#246
|
Date Joined:
May 19, 2011
|
"Monte, we've told you, we're having everyone play every edition of D&D. You still haven't played 4e. You have to play 4e. You know what, yes, your job does depend on it now. It's the entire spirit of the project."
(I kid, I kid)
Aww, Mom! Do I have too?
I'd rather be forced to play 4e(or 3.5e just to kepe the analogy appropriate) than have to eat brussel sprouts again.......ok, thats unfair, I actually don't mind brussel sprouts.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 6:25PM
#247
|
Date Joined:
Mar 30, 2012
|
This is honestly starting to somewhat feel like bizzarro world. When did Monte become some sort of "guardian of D&D tradition"? Because people hardly labeled him that when 3e was first released...
Or even when it was around. Even fans of 3e, at least in my experince, disliked Cook's design.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 6:27PM
#248
|
Date Joined:
Mar 19, 2004
|
Naw dude. Bean sprouts are the real wonder vegetable.
Anyway, as I said before my post was moderated:
I have no sorrow for the loss of Monte Cooke, and no pity to those who are abandoning ship merely due to his dereliction.
Even looking at it from an objective standpoint, my opinion on 5E hasn't been swayed from Cooke's abandonment: I've seen plenty of good, nay great projects that have culminated despite the desertion of overrated key members. This only means that the remaining team will be put to the test.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 6:40PM
#249
|
|
|
Do people really think all of 4e was some massive, sudden, out-of-the-blue change? That there was no build-up, no gradual introduction of the concepts in the previous edition, no consideration of the vast amount of feedback from those players, and which "new concept" products were popular (and more importantly, selling) in that edition's later years?
It had nothing to do with anything I had ever heard from anyone I ever played with or talked to (with maybe a half dozen minor exceptions). I realize the experience of others differed. A lot of the THEORY was great from an industry standpoint (what you point out as 'new concept' products), but had NOTHING to do with what D&D had been up to that point, and so to many of us should have been a new game rather than shoehorning an entire game to fit a fad.
I'll just say as a counterpoint to this that 4e is aimed SQUARELY at addressing the things that were issues to many of us even at the rollout of 2e and which we were a bit disappointed to see not really addressed well then.
Of course I also fall into the category of people who came back to play 4e. 3e never caught my interest, 2e seemed quaint and insufficiently revised, though we continued to use it as a sort of 'cleaned up 1e' for as long as we continued to play. None of them were bad games at all, but 4e directly addressed many, if not most, of the things that a lot of us had found to be issues in AD&D.
I've also found that 4e gets a pretty good reception amongst both brand new and old players. Since it was released D&D has for the first time in 15+ years become a game that is in our regular rotation to play. I'm sure I could dig up players for an AD&D game since I have a pretty decent list of people to work from, but I have yet to have any trouble having enough people around to play 4e.
It will be quite interesting to see what the playtest shows us. Personally I know I want to see the kind of "make it a good game" sensibilities that work with 4e and I definitely want to see the kind of play style we've got now being well supported. There are loads of things that can be improved still though. 4e is a pretty new system in some ways and it would benefit a lot from a rewrite. I think personally that a lot of things that bother people about it are not as deep as they think either. With the right tweaks it should easily meet their expectations, assuming they'll step out of the edition war mentality and give it a go.
As to Monte... Eh, I am not convinced he had a great handle on mechanics and he certainly didn't SEEM to have a good understanding of what 4e could do well. They certainly needed someone with a strong creative voice though. It could break either way. It kind of depends on how set they are on where they think they're going right now. Whoever takes over is going to have to be able to go with their own vision or it will probably not soar.
That is not dead which may eternal lie
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 6:51PM
#250
|
Date Joined:
Apr 27, 2012
|
@AbdulAlhazred
I am a really old gamer and I don't like 4e. I played the red box and then 1e,2e,3e,4e.
I would like a cross between 1e and 3e. The simplicity,speed,and grit of 1e and some more options and clarifications from 3e.
|
|
|
