Marking Marked and Other 4E-isms

76 posts / 0 new
Last post
That's right, my friends: 4E combat is so simple, that it only takes 37 kinds of beads and counters to keep track of what's happening in game.

IMAGE(http://wizards.com/dnd/images/savemygame_20080227_4.jpg)



Seriously, though, I don't understand why they're giving characters all of these abilities that only work on one opponent, and which need to be activated. I don't know about you, but in my game, it's abilities like these (Dodge and Power Attack come to mind) that are the easiest to forget about. I'm not really sure why they decided to create more of them for the game.
I am marked and bloodied and have no surges? It might be hard to track such things in larger parties. I also wonder how this has simplified the game?

I am not so sure the abilities will be that hard to track as they seem to be the main source of character power during combat. Although you will need to keep closer track of how many uses you have left unlike Power Attack which could be used anytime.
I found it was pretty easy to keep track of at the tables at DDXP.

The only time(s) it became an issue was when there were multiple mobs and the DM would start to attack someone other than the person (usually the Paladin) that had marked them.

Then it was as easy as the player using the mark saying "he'll take damage from me if he does that" and the GM would adjust accordingly.

Though, I did talk to the Alea Tools guys at the lobbibar about some of their plans to help players integrate their markers to show what flags/conditions exist on the table.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

My group has 8 players, so initially I was not pleased with marked and bloodied.

Particularly bloodied, as it in way has a very metagamish feel to it. Now everyone everywhere will know when thier opponent is down to to half their HP (I suppose it works for in reverse for healers, but ive always let mine make a heal check to query the other players health anyways).

But its one of those mechanics that ill just have to try to really get a feeling for. Im sure I can get some plastic bits (like the one under the Azer Fighter int he pic) from somewhere. will have to have a look before my 4e camp starts this July
The "plastic bits" in the picture look like Alea Tools (www.aleatools.com), and I already use them in my 3.5 game - and recommend them.

The upside is that they're magnetic, and you can order magnetic sheets pre-cut into 1-inch circles with stickum on the one side. You apply the magnet to your mini, and now your mini will magnetically hold to the tools.

The tools themselves can be written on with wet OR dry erase markers (useful for labeling goblin 1-4), and can stack with each other to represent assorted statuses, or even altitude/depth for 3d combat (aerial or aquatic).

The downside is that the magnets have a tendency to stick together when units are in close combat.

They showed me a prototype at DDXP of new units that don't do that anymore, and I sincerely hope they market those new bits soon.

As for being bloodied. . . I kinda like it. It works for both NPCs and Monsters, but it also has assorted in-game effects.

Some gnolls I was battling, for example, went into a rage when bloodied. If you were bloodied while fighting them, they got a free immediate bite attack against you.

That added to the excitement of the fight for me.

It also meant I learned real quick that in most battles the party is better off focusing on one or two targets instead of each character choosing a target of their own. You don't want a band of bloodied gnolls in front of you.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

I'm not so concerned about marking conditions as I'm concerned about tracking uses of daily and encounter abilities.

Some of the sample characters had numerous daily abilities (eg. IIRC the pregen. paladin has a daily power and an encounter power that has a maximum number of daily powers) and all of the magic items granted a daily or encounter power. You'll need some way to track them. If higher level characters will be able to use more than one encounter power per encounter, then you'll need a way to track them too.

A poster on another forum suggested coloured cards (white = at-will, blue = encounter, red = daily) and I think I'll have to adopt a similar system.
working on the assumption that these are not what "real" character sheets will look like, I'm thinking that a simple series of checkboxes would suffice.

Especially with the trend I've been seeing of people putting their character sheets in protective plastic sleeves that can be written on with either wet or dry-erase markers.

I think I'm going to adopt that system and just check my daily uses off as they go. Then, when I rest, erase the plastic sheet.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

Im not so worried about the per encounter and per day ability tracking. Ive had a lot of success with index cards (Especially with 9 swords characters whihc are almost impossible to play without).
Having been running 4E sessions for a little while now, I haven't had any problem with these things.

Marked. Running with a five person group, it's possible you'll have both a paladin and fighter (or two of either one), but odds are you'll have one or the other. In both cases, marking requires active involvement from the player. The version of the divine challenge seen at DDXP isn't the final version, and all I'll say is that with the final version it's hard to forget who the paladin had marked. I like Alea Tools, and I may start using them for marking in the future - but so far I've never felt the need to physically indicae a marked opponent; it's always been easy to remember.

Bloodied. Actually, I really like this as a solid point at which I will let a player know "OK, you've hurt this guy." So they don't know how many hit points he has, but when they've hit him for 40 and he's still not bloodied, they can say "Crap!" When he finally is bloodied, they get to say "OK! We're on the downhill now!" As for tracking players, I just use a whiteboard that shows their current hitpoints - as a result, it's trivial to see who's bloodied and who isn't. However, the fact of the matter is that only a handful of characters or monsters have bloodied-related abilities. Most of the time, all it means is that the players know that they've made significant progress against the enemy; it's not a big thing, just "Hey, is he bloodied?" I look at his hit point total and say "Yup."

Encounter or Daily Powers. Again, just hasn't been a problem. The player has a sheet, the power has a box to check off. Beyond that, using a daily power is a big deal - an important tactical decision for a player, and something that's likely to have an impact on the field of battle. It's not the sort of thing that's easy to forget. And characters have far fewer limited-use powers than, say, any of the typical Vancian spellcasters. By the time I'm a 5th level 3E wizard, I may be keeping track of 13 daily powers; as a 4E wizard, I'm keeping track of 2 dailies and 2 encounters. It's just not that bad.

In terms of simplicity, it's all about interface design. The paladin's challenge is a very easy tool to use. Making something like trip an encounter power (and one that only requires a single roll) as opposed to something everyone can do, that invariably requires someone to haul out the book, and that requires a batch of checks is an awkward tool to use. We can still have the battle scene in which I trip you or knock you off a bridge - but it moves more quickly, and the player who can trip knows exactly how it works and what his limitations are.
Sorry, I cant help but think of warforged when I see you lurking around. Which leads me to begin to wonder how bloodied will work with constructs or other opponents who dont actually have blood per say.

I guess it could be a racial feature (or feat) or mechanical or contruct themed monsters and players to have some immunity or resistance to the bloodied condition. Perhaps a generic on size fits all rule would be more in line with the 4e play experience.

But I cant help but wonder about the possibilites.

Be good.
Which leads me to begin to wonder how bloodied will work with constructs or other opponents who dont actually have blood per say.

"Bloodied" is just an expression; it doesn't actually require blood. A skeleton can be bloodied. It simply means that the creature has suffered a significant amount of damage. When a player strikes a blow that bloodies a skeleton, I'm likely to describe it more dramatically; he shatters a half-dozen ribs, and a femur is starting to fracture. Same for a construct. An iron golem shouldn't be in perfect shape at 1 HP, and shattered at 0 HP; when he's "bloodied", you should be seeing fractures and dents, clear signs that you're wearing him down.

Should you have a character with a special ability that relates to this - +1 damage against bloodied targets, for example - I simply read it as either "You know how to take advantage of an opponent's wounded state" or "You're invigorated by the sight of an injured foe" - not literally that you need to taste their blood.
Thats cool,

I was guessing it was gonna be a one size fits all rule. Ive just been pondering rule variations, and how they might apply to different types of creatures.

But its looking been like monsters in 4e are different in terms of how they play out with thier new abilities and tactical options (much like the player classes) and less about thier racial traits and qualities.

Should be interesting to give it a real go through and try it out.
While some of the rules and new powers seem interesting, I have to say that image of the game table with markers and and beads is really off putting. To me RPGs have always been about imagination, and just like after you see the film it's hard to read a book without conjuring up mental images based on what you saw in the movie. I find it harder to imagine a flaming Azer fighter when I see a 2 inch miniature in front of me on the table, and now he's going to have a little bead on his head and standing on a colourful disc it's making escaping the fact you are playing a what is essentially a board game harder.

That picture has done more to turn me off the new edition than anything I've seen written so far.
That picture has done more to turn me off the new edition than anything I've seen written so far.

But that picture has absolutely nothing to do with the new edition, DMaple. I've been running the new edition since January, and my table looks exactly the same as it always has.

CAN you use the Alea disks to mark conditions? Sure. Just as you can use them in 3E to indicate a Dodge target, someone who's flanked, a victim of a spell effect or other condition (sickened, dazed, charmed), someone who's invisible, or any number of things. You can use multiple disks to indicate the height of a flying character.

Alea Tools - the maker of those disks - has been in business for YEARS. This is not some sort of tool designed for 4E. If you find it a useful tool, you can use them. If you don't, I haven't found them to be any more *necessary* for 4E than they are for 3E - and while the PHB says that you'll want dice, a mini to represent your character, and a grid sheet for running a battle, it says NOTHING about disks or beads.

That's not a picture of 4E; it's a picture of a D&D game being run by a certain type of DM, and it could just as easily be 3E as 4E.
That's not a picture of 4E; it's a picture of a D&D game being run by a certain type of DM, and it could just as easily be 3E as 4E.

Heck, unless the source is from somewhere here on the WotC site, there's no guarantee that that's even a D&D game.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

Heck, unless the source is from somewhere here on the WotC site, there's no guarantee that that's even a D&D game.

You mean this Dungeon Article?

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dusg/20080227a
Yeah, yeah. I've been gone for a couple weeks, I'm not fully up-to-speed on the magazine articles.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

Encounter or Daily Powers. Again, just hasn't been a problem. The player has a sheet, the power has a box to check off. Beyond that, using a daily power is a big deal - an important tactical decision for a player, and something that's likely to have an impact on the field of battle. It's not the sort of thing that's easy to forget. And characters have far fewer limited-use powers than, say, any of the typical Vancian spellcasters. By the time I'm a 5th level 3E wizard, I may be keeping track of 13 daily powers; as a 4E wizard, I'm keeping track of 2 dailies and 2 encounters. It's just not that bad.

My concern about these abilities isn't how easy they are to use when you actually remember to use them. My concern is how easy it is to forget that you have these abilities in the first place. For example, in 3.5, I often forget to use things like Dodge, Power Attack, smite evil, stunning fist, etc., because I have to declare that I'm using these abilities before making an attack. I can't imagine that having more of these abilities to keep track of will make things any easier.

Meanwhile I'm not the only person I know that has this problem. If I were, I don't think I'd be as skeptical. However, I can't tell you how many times I hear players at my table say something like "Oh crap! I forgot to use an action die!" or "Oh shoot! my knight has bulwark defense! He so should have taken his attack of opportunity on that troll!" or "Oh yeah! My character is a paladin, and is immune to fear effects. I guess she wouldn't have run away then, huh?" These are all abilities that, as you put it, have an impact on the field of battle, and yet their impact doesn't seem to have an effect on how easy they are to forget. Therefore, it's hard for me to imagine how adding more use activated abilities will do anything other than make this problem a more frequent occurrence.

Personally, I like abilities that work all the time. Paladins add their Charisma bonus to all saves. Weapon Focus gives fighters a +1 on all attacks with a particular weapon. Monks add their Wisdom bonus to AC. Improved Trip gives you a +4 bonus to trip attempts. You can't forget about these abilities, because they're already calculated in and they happen every time you use them. If I could only use Improved Trip against creatures that are one size category smaller than my character, or if I had to declare at the beginning of combat that my monk is going to add his Wisdom bonus to his AC, I'd probably forget about these abilities all the time. However, since they're already calculated into my character's abilities, I love having them, because I don't have to even think about them, they just happen.

I don't know, Keith. Maybe 4E is great, and when I finally get around to playing it, I'll forget that I ever had this reservation. Right now, though, I am concerned that the game is getting overloaded with these use activated abilities that only work on one character, or in one situation, and which require players to be almost hyperfocused on the game so that they don't miss an opportunity to use their character's abilities.

Of course, that's just my
My concern about these abilities isn't how easy they are to use when you actually remember to use them. My concern is how easy it is to forget that you have these abilities in the first place.

And all I can tell you is that having been playing for a few months now, I just haven't found it to be a problem. Forgetting to use a daily or encounter power isn't like forgetting to use dodge; it's like a 5th level wizard forgetting that he has a fireball. And in 4E, the 5th level wizard has far fewer spells to keep track of than his 3E counterpart.

With the fighter, the key point is that your daily power isn't something that adds to your attack; your daily power IS an attack. Again, it's like the wizard deciding whether or not to use a fireball: does this situation call for unleashing the big gun? One of the players in my game is a fighter, and he's never said "Man! I forgot about my encounter power!"

Therefore, it's hard for me to imagine how adding more use activated abilities will do anything other than make this problem a more frequent occurrence.

One thing I'd raise is that a number of the powers you mention AREN'T activated abilities - they are PASSIVE abilities, which are in my opinion far easier to forget. "D'oh! The paladin has immunity to fear!" And I don't think passive bonuses are especially easy to track; I can't tell you how many times I've had players forget to add in the bonuses from bard song (this scene is one I've seen all too often). Sure, a paladin getting flat bonuses to HIS saves is easy. But once he extends passive bonuses to those around him, it's hard - and as you yourself noted, once those bonuses aren't numerical it gets easier to forget them.

Looking to active abilities that have been called out, you have the paladin's divine challenge. Could you forget to use this? Sure. But it's never happened in any game I've run, precisely because it's such an important and useful power. The paladin loves his challenge; it's one of his favorite things about the character.

if I had to declare at the beginning of combat that my monk is going to add his Wisdom bonus to his AC...

And I don't see 4E as having lots of powers like this... if anything, less than 3E, given that bard song was a classic for this. Again, I can't use specific examples because I can't reveal anything that hasn't already been revealed - but I can say that I've found combat to be far easier to track than in 3E.

Right now, though, I am concerned that the game is getting overloaded with these use activated abilities that only work on one character, or in one situation, and which require players to be almost hyperfocused on the game so that they don't miss an opportunity to use their character's abilities.

And there's not much I can do to convince you otherwise, DA. All I can say is that I love it, and I'm someone who by and large prefers story to combat - so having to be "hyperfocused" is not high on my list of goals for gamers. It really doesn't play that way, and it doesn't require the use of 52 beads and disks to make it work; again, I'll point out that Alea made those disks for 3E. CAN you use Alea disks? Sure, and they'll be just as useful in 4E as 3E. But I haven't found them to be any more necessary. I've found 4E to be faster that 3E combat, and more than that, more fun... and personally, I WAS very dubious when I first gave it a try.

So hey, see for yourself when it comes out. Perhaps you'll like it, perhaps not - I'm not going to say that it's perfect for everyone. But I've never found this particular issue to be a concern in actual play.
I guess I'll just have to trust you, Keith, since you've actually played it, and I have not. Maybe when they actually release it, I'll see what you're seeing. At the moment, though I'm still not seeing how marking someone is all that different from Dodge.

In any event, I do recall that when they were promoting the release Eberron, every promotional article that I read about it made it sound like the dumbest campaign setting ever. However, when it finally came out, I was totally blown away by how cool it is. So maybe it's just the promotional campaign that sucks. Maybe 4E is going to be way cool. I honestly don't know. Until it comes out, though, I think I'm going to remain skeptical.

By the way, it was good to talk to you again. I haven't been on the Eberron boards since the announcement of 4E, so I guess I just never realized how much I missed talking to my favorite Hellcow. Take care.
My concern about these abilities isn't how easy they are to use when you actually remember to use them. My concern is how easy it is to forget that you have these abilities in the first place. For example, in 3.5, I often forget to use things like Dodge, Power Attack, smite evil, stunning fist, etc., because I have to declare that I'm using these abilities before making an attack. I can't imagine that having more of these abilities to keep track of will make things any easier.

Meanwhile I'm not the only person I know that has this problem. If I were, I don't think I'd be as skeptical. However, I can't tell you how many times I hear players at my table say something like "Oh crap! I forgot to use an action die!" or "Oh shoot! my knight has bulwark defense! He so should have taken his attack of opportunity on that troll!" or "Oh yeah! My character is a paladin, and is immune to fear effects. I guess she wouldn't have run away then, huh?" These are all abilities that, as you put it, have an impact on the field of battle, and yet their impact doesn't seem to have an effect on how easy they are to forget. Therefore, it's hard for me to imagine how adding more use activated abilities will do anything other than make this problem a more frequent occurrence.

Personally, I like abilities that work all the time. Paladins add their Charisma bonus to all saves. Weapon Focus gives fighters a +1 on all attacks with a particular weapon. Monks add their Wisdom bonus to AC. Improved Trip gives you a +4 bonus to trip attempts. You can't forget about these abilities, because they're already calculated in and they happen every time you use them. If I could only use Improved Trip against creatures that are one size category smaller than my character, or if I had to declare at the beginning of combat that my monk is going to add his Wisdom bonus to his AC, I'd probably forget about these abilities all the time. However, since they're already calculated into my character's abilities, I love having them, because I don't have to even think about them, they just happen.

I don't know, Keith. Maybe 4E is great, and when I finally get around to playing it, I'll forget that I ever had this reservation. Right now, though, I am concerned that the game is getting overloaded with these use activated abilities that only work on one character, or in one situation, and which require players to be almost hyperfocused on the game so that they don't miss an opportunity to use their character's abilities.

Of course, that's just my

I'm not as eloquent as our beloved Hellcow, but I have to agree with him, having played it at DDXP.

I was worried, like you, that it'd be easy to forget the way Dodge and the like are forgotten.

However, even in my last game of the con, which was LFR Preview2, there was only one, maybe two times where the GM had to be reminded that the Paladin had challenged NPC1 (and even those can be chalked up to the DM perhaps not having heard the player, given how noisy/chaotic tables are at the con, not to mention simply being tired after a weekend full of 4E demos).

I can' put my finger on *why* it's easy to keep track of challenges, other than to repeat after Hellcow. Somehow, the simple act of making them active abilities makes them easier to recall.

I think the fact that they're "targeted" at individual PCs or NPCs seems to help it be easier to track than abilities that affect "everyone". Can't put my finger on it, but that - combined with faster rounds in general - just made it so that it didn't take any effort to keep track of effects.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

At the moment, though I'm still not seeing how marking someone is all that different from Dodge.

Mechanically, it's fundamentally the same: choose an opponent and make him subject to a condition.

Now, looking to paladin's challenge, I'd argue that it's different because it's simply more significant. It's one of the major character abilities of the paladin and something that has an active effect every time I use the target creature (not simply when it attacks the dodging creature). First, it's cool for the paladin - it's not just a personal defense, it's a chance to change the tactics of the battlefield. While as a DM, it's something that I have to seriously consider when I use that creature - will he defy the challenge? Conversely, the fact that character A is getting a +1 to AC against monster B just isn't that exciting, especially if the monster isn't fighting him at the moment - it's easy to forget. And all I can say is that it never even occured to me to use an Alea disk (and I own many) to indicate the marked target - simply because I've never had trouble remembering.

Beyond that, though, the main thing is that I don't feel that 4E has MORE of these sort of abilities. The mark is a good example, but you've been comparing it to Dodge - a 3E ability. Forgetting a daily or encounter power is, as I've said, more on par with forgetting to cast fireball or forgetting that you wanted to make a trip attack than forgetting to use Power Attack or that you had Improved Trip... and certainly as you get to higher levels, the number of powers are easier to manage than the spells of a high-level wizard.

But again, you don't need to trust me. Just try for yourself when it's actually out. You may not like it - but I don't think it's going to be as bad as you think.

In any event, I do recall that when they were promoting the release Eberron, every promotional article that I read about it made it sound like the dumbest campaign setting ever. However, when it finally came out, I was totally blown away by how cool it is.

And that's why I'm posting on this distinctly non-Eberron thread in the first place - because I see exactly the same thing. In the year before Eberron, I remember the constant deluge of people looking at the previews and saying "This is moronic", when I knew that they simply couldn't see the world as it was. As someone playing 4E and enjoying it, I see the same thing here, and it drives me nuts. It shouldn't, because it's not my game - but it still makes me sad to see misdirected hostility when I know how much fun I'm having (and as with Eberron am not in a position to reveal too much).

So certainly, I don't blame you for being dubious. Just bear in mind that things may not be as they appear, and take a look for yourself when you have the chance.

I haven't been on the Eberron boards since the announcement of 4E, so I guess I just never realized how much I missed talking to my favorite Hellcow. Take care.

I'd noticed! And same back atcha.
They should give you cards with your abilities on them and you can arrange them on your side of the table. When you use an ability, you flip it over until the cool down period has expired. That way, you wont HAVE TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS AND WORLD OF WARCRAFT.
They should give you cards with your abilities on them and you can arrange them on your side of the table. When you use an ability, you flip it over until the cool down period has expired. That way, you wont HAVE TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS AND WORLD OF WARCRAFT.

Cooldown? Like for example all spells with duration from 1st ed onwards?

What on earth makes you think that the concept of having things with duration means its so much like World of Warcraft? Can you really be unaware of all the things that have duration with all versions of D&D?

Seems to me like you haven't really engaged your brain before letting your fingers near the keyboard...
Cooldown? Like for example all spells with duration from 1st ed onwards?

What on earth makes you think that the concept of having things with duration means its so much like World of Warcraft? Can you really be unaware of all the things that have duration with all versions of D&D?

Seems to me like you haven't really engaged your brain before letting your fingers near the keyboard...

Cooldown doesn't refer to spell durations -- it refers to the period between when a power was used and the next time the power can be used.

Cooldown for at-will powers = 0 they are always available.
Cooldown for per-encounter powers = about 5 minutes
Cooldown for daily powers = about 6 hours.
Cooldown for per-encounter powers = about 5 minutes

Although unlike WoW, "Cooldown" for encounter powers ISN'T automatic. You actually need to pause and take a five minute rest - to get your breath back. As a 4E playtester, I've been in a number of situations where we simply haven't had time between encounters to stop for that rest. So it's not some sort of magic timer that starts the moment you cast the power, like WoW; it's something you can recover with a brief rest.
You cannot, any of you, tell me that the new artistic designs coupled with the new focus on single-class play and multiple skill trees does not simply reak of World of Warcraft. WotC is after that big fat MMO pie.

Back in the 70's Gygax stated that he was less inspired by Lord of the Rings so much as he used the familiar imagery as free marketing. That's what this is.

The new content of 4e is WotC trying to cash in on the new cult craze of MMO's which are at their highest subscription rates ever.

I like video games, and I like DnD. I have been playing both my entire life. I enjoy the fact that they are run two different ways.

I think the "mission xp" concept of 4e, and the "talent builds" as well as the new "toggle powers" (which though similar to powers of older editions of the game, are now FAR more prolific) down to the games' art design where none of you can say does not resemble World of Warcraft.

How long is it before you can register your character online with WotC and run them through solo adventures with a computer DM? Or how long even until you HAVE to?

The writing talent of WotC has been dead since Monte, Skip, and Jonathan quit producing regularly.

Instead of focusing on the best done DnD worlds, like Greyhawk, the choose to focus on pre-fab settings like the Forgotten Realms and (lord help you) Eberron.

Dungeons and Dragons is an established game with millions of fans worldwide. It's obvious that the call for 4e came about when WotC ran out of crappy content books to release for 3.5, but how long can this go on? I played AD&D forever and was glad to see 3.0 come about, it was like Skills and Powers put to better use. But 4e is something different, not only does it not involve production talent from the greats who have been with the games' design for decades, but it is a sham.

4e is the worst thing to happen to DnD since demon and devil were taken out for 2nd edition to appears the christians. 4e is them casting off their dignity to get a piece of that fat WoW pie.

Does anyone else think it ironic that Gygax passed away so soon to 4e's release?

Maybe he was lucky. I know if I saw my life's epic degenerate to such dismal lows I would not want to live to see it.
You cannot, any of you, tell me that the new artistic designs coupled with the new focus on single-class play and multiple skill trees does not simply reak of World of Warcraft. WotC is after that big fat MMO pie.

Let's assume you're right (I heartily disagree, but let's go with it anyhow). Would it really be a bad thing if *gasp* they want to grow their customer base?

Darn! I might find more people to play with!

Back in the 70's Gygax stated that he was less inspired by Lord of the Rings so much as he used the familiar imagery as free marketing. That's what this is.

Assumption and conjecture.

The new content of 4e is WotC trying to cash in on the new cult craze of MMO's which are at their highest subscription rates ever.

I like video games, and I like DnD. I have been playing both my entire life. I enjoy the fact that they are run two different ways.

And. . . . they're still run different ways. I mean, we're still talking about a game where a group of players sits around rolling dice, with one of them directing the story/action.

The fact that this is different is also evidenced by the fact that there's a WoW tabletop RPG. Not only that, it's a d20 game system (http://www.white-wolf.com/warcraftrpg/index.php?line=intro).

I think the "mission xp" concept of 4e, and the "talent builds" as well as the new "toggle powers" (which though similar to powers of older editions of the game, are now FAR more prolific) down to the games' art design where none of you can say does not resemble World of Warcraft.

Resemble? Sure. Then again WoW games resemble D&D games, there's fighters, paladins, theif (rogue), priest (cleric) and other similarities in the class system alone.

How long is it before you can register your character online with WotC and run them through solo adventures with a computer DM? Or how long even until you HAVE to?

Well, let's see, Eye of the Beholder was a PC game back around 1993. It was a single game of a player in a dungeon trying to get out (or. . . to the center? Been too long since I played it, or its sequels).

Of course, that was based on 2nd Edition. . . and didn't give you the freedom of options that a tabletop game gives you. Oh, and because it was computer-run, it didn't come up with new adventures when you finished the game. You were just. . . done.

The writing talent of WotC has been dead since Monte, Skip, and Jonathan quit producing regularly.

Can't debate that. Not because you're right or wrong, but because that's a highly subject and personal opinion.

Instead of focusing on the best done DnD worlds, like Greyhawk, the choose to focus on pre-fab settings like the Forgotten Realms and (lord help you) Eberron.

So, by labeling those worlds pre-fab that means Greyhawk wasn't? What, specifically, is wrong with the other worlds, beyond the fact that they aren't your personal favorite? The fact that they're not 20+ years old?

Heaven forbid this game get the occasional infusion of new blood and new ways of looking at things (like Eberron has done with its variations on the flavor of the base classes).

Dungeons and Dragons is an established game with millions of fans worldwide. It's obvious that the call for 4e came about when WotC ran out of crappy content books to release for 3.5, but how long can this go on? I played AD&D forever and was glad to see 3.0 come about, it was like Skills and Powers put to better use. But 4e is something different, not only does it not involve production talent from the greats who have been with the games' design for decades, but it is a sham.

Or it could be that the design team looked at the holes in the 3E rules and decided that, instead or working around them, it was time to rebuild from the ground-up, as they stated in Worlds and Classes.

Maybe they were listening to the fans at conventions, and here on the forums.

Maybe they looked at the fact that the RPGA has to drastically alter rules for its campaigns to avoid power-creep.

When your nationwide campaigns that are a big part of the public face for your game have to run with limitations on the rules, that should say something about the inherant problems in those rules.

4e is the worst thing to happen to DnD since demon and devil were taken out for 2nd edition to appears the christians. 4e is them casting off their dignity to get a piece of that fat WoW pie.

Now you're simply grandstanding. Their dignity? Please.

Does anyone else think it ironic that Gygax passed away so soon to 4e's release?

Maybe he was lucky. I know if I saw my life's epic degenerate to such dismal lows I would not want to live to see it.

That's simple trolling.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

Gary Gygax himself stated that he used Tolkien as an influence to draw gamers in the 1983 dungeons and dragons basic set, as well as that he was legally forced to change the names of the hobbit to halfling, the ent to treant, and balrog to balor.

WoW has a particular content and art style. The focus on stacking effects such as the classes having moves which deal more damage to a enemy they have "marked." Additionally, the inclusion of the Tiefling, which now looks near exactly like the Draenei seems quite shameless.

You missed several of my points. Which is not surprising. Essentially every RPG uses the character classes pioneered by DnD. The WoW variants, however, now are becoming the prevalent incarnations, even with DnD from which they originate.

Registering a character with WoTC to run an online campaign, or perhaps the entire rules system diverting to online only play has very little in common with Eye of the Beholder, which was a half-assed SNES and PC Undermountain game developed by Capcom in the 1990's. There have been dozens of DnD inspired games, but they all have almost nothing to do with my current protest. I am against the direction, the online emphasis, that WotC is putting on DnD. I have been playing the game for 20 years. I have seen all the editions and played them.

By pre-fab world I mean that everything is a certain way. All of the books, novels, and fan-base have cemented the world into a certain way. When you play Forgotten Realms or Eberron you are cemented into a world already limited by so very much. Greyhawk has the least amount of absolutes. I read somewhere on WotC's website that 70% of all players play homebrew settings. This means that Greyhawk likely still sees more play than either of their pre-fabs, for Greyhawk gives you the most freedom. And even still, 4e still references Greyhawk deities because the ones in FR and Eberron suck

3.5 didn't have so many plot holes as it had players too lazy to learn all of the rules. They are taking the game and forcing you to use miniatures (which they sell, btw) and other physical manifestations that make it so that memorization of the less commonly used rules (grappling) is not necessary. I must have the only 3.5 group that understands how grappling works.

And as for the RPGA, I could give a rat's ass about the RPGA. All I need is someone else telling me how to run my game. I had an RPGA rep stop me during a session in Denny's to tell me that I (being in Kansas) shouldn't be running a Greyhawk game in Keoland, rather I should be in Dyvers.

If you are a true DnD fan you should look at Troll and Toad games. Their line of RPG's is considerably more true to the soul of DnD.

Also, I can spell the word thief right.

If you are going to try to contradict me, at least figure out what I'm talking about before you curl up next to your WotC masters.
You cannot, any of you, tell me that the new artistic designs coupled with the new focus on single-class play and multiple skill trees does not simply reak of World of Warcraft.

Actually I can. As someone who's played the game, it's nothing like playing WoW or any MMO. As WolfStar76 says, it's a $#%@ tabletop game. Let's just start with combat. Fighting in an MMO is a real-time experience. You've got nothing along the lines of AOs or tactical movement (shifting, bull rushes, not to mention new effects like the rogue's Positioning Strike). The actions of enemies in MMOs are driven by simple AI systems lacking any of the complexity you get out of a tabletop situation. Even with the encounter-based powers, as I've just stated, they AREN'T WoW-lite cooldowns; they are a variation of Vancian Magic that allows you to get back some abilities after a 5 minute rest as opposed to a full night's sleep - and having played with them, it's possible to get into situations where you just can't take that five minutes.

As for single-class play, you're drawing conclusions based on limited information. Multiclassing doesn't work the way it did before. However, it's actually trivially easy to add some of the flavor of another class to a character. You remain a fighter with a touch of rogue or a rogue with a touch of fighter, as opposed to a full 50/50 rogue/fighter - but it's nonetheless a level of diversity you certainly don't see in WoW. And as for skill trees, the powers of 4E are nothing like the skill trees of WoW. Aside from paragon paths, powers aren't linked together in chains; my power choices at 3rd level aren't somehow locked to my power choices at first level, even if there are choices that may make more sense based on my overall character design. Is there some vague similarity? Sure, and you could say the same of many other systems out there. But it's hardly a mirror image, and it's not like someone who knows how to play WoW is going to look at it and say "Oh, it's exactly the same!"

I think the "mission xp" concept of 4e...

... is just another presentation of "Story Awards" from page 40 of the 3.5 DMG? Yeah, me too.

4E has taken some inspiration from MMOs. But there's this hysterical reaction that completely ignores the fact that the experience of playing 4E D&D is far closer to playing 3E than to actually PLAYING WoW. You are sitting around a table with friends. You are engaging in tactical, turn-based combat in which position and strategy play a greater role than in WoW, and in which you can come up with original ideas of your own - because there's a DM there to decide what happens if you want to flip the table in the inn on top of the bad guy or swing on the chandelier. Beyond combat, you're not limited to some preprogrammed series of responses - and while their may be Quest XP, do you honestly expect DMs to start making quests like WoW quests? "Kill six kobolds." "Delivery this box to the blacksmith." If so, that's the DM being lame, not the system. As a DM, I'd be more inclined to make a story objective "Solve the murder of Baron So and So" - which is going to be a STORY, and one you'd have a hard time telling in an MMO. I LIKE the fact that there's a greater weight placed on non-combat objectives - but what those objectives are will always be in the hands of the DM, because the fact that you have a DM is one of the things that has and always will make this a different experience than WoW.

As someone who's played every edition of D&D and most of the major MMOs, I find this hysterical reaction to be sad and shortsighted. Yes, the game is changing. But it hasn't BECOME WoW, and as long as it relies of the imagination of both player and DM, it never will.
If you are going to try to contradict me, at least figure out what I'm talking about before you curl up next to your WotC masters.

Oooh, I wish I could be as edgy and revolutionary as you. But I guess I'm just a sheep curled up next to my WotC masters.

I'm sorry, but I've played 3E, and I've played 4E (and 1st and 2nd) and I've played WoW, Everquest, DAoC, and on and on and on. Have the designers taken some inspiration from MMOs? Yes. But nowhere near the level you suggest. Playing 4E D&D is NOT like playing an MMO. Among other things, next time you play in WoW, why don't you go ahead and grapple someone? It may not work the same way it did in 3E, but grappling still remains in 4E - because tactical movement is still a part of the game.

This whole "WotC Masters" crap is just a pathetic, trolling attempt to look edgy and rebellious. You don't understand how 4E works, and you're drawing flawed conclusions to try to make it seem as bad as you want it to be.
If you are a true DnD fan you should look at Troll and Toad games. Their line of RPG's is considerably more true to the soul of DnD.

You might have better luck if you try Troll Lord Games, the company that Gary Gygax wrote for over the last few years (with products including Lejendary Adventure, Castle Zagyg, The Canting Crew, and more). Troll & Toad Games is an online retailer, which at a quick search doesn't even seem to carry Troll Lord products.
Gary Gygax himself stated that he used Tolkien as an influence to draw gamers in the 1983 dungeons and dragons basic set, as well as that he was legally forced to change the names of the hobbit to halfling, the ent to treant, and balrog to balor.

I should have been more clear. I was referring to your assumption that WotC is doing the same.

WoW has a particular content and art style. The focus on stacking effects such as the classes having moves which deal more damage to a enemy they have "marked." Additionally, the inclusion of the Tiefling, which now looks near exactly like the Draenei seems quite shameless.

Yeah, because all the tieflings I've seen have blue skin, hooves for feet, and little glowing sigils over their heads.

You missed several of my points. Which is not surprising. Essentially every RPG uses the character classes pioneered by DnD. The WoW variants, however, now are becoming the prevalent incarnations, even with DnD from which they originate.

If people consistently miss your points, is the problem with the audience, or with the speaker?

I disagree with the WoW archetypes being the prevailent forms, but that's a matter of our respective viewpoints and opinons.

Registering a character with WoTC to run an online campaign, or perhaps the entire rules system diverting to online only play has very little in common with Eye of the Beholder, which was a half-assed SNES and PC Undermountain game developed by Capcom in the 1990's. There have been dozens of DnD inspired games, but they all have almost nothing to do with my current protest. I am against the direction, the online emphasis, that WotC is putting on DnD. I have been playing the game for 20 years. I have seen all the editions and played them.

So, where's your evidence then that WotC is planning to move to a system that will somehow have an AI that's capable of accounting for every potential action by a player? Since a limited action game that's been done before doesn't match your description, I can only assume you're referring to a more robust system.

Unless you mean a system like DDO, which was done long before 4E was an issue. Then again, you said a single-player game in your original example, so that can't be it either.

Just because you want too create the concept of them moving to some "nefarious" online-run campaign doesn't mean that it's really happening, or that it would even be a bad thing if they did.

It doesn't have to be YOUR style of play to be a successful, fun method of play.

By pre-fab world I mean that everything is a certain way. All of the books, novels, and fan-base have cemented the world into a certain way. When you play Forgotten Realms or Eberron you are cemented into a world already limited by so very much. Greyhawk has the least amount of absolutes. I read somewhere on WotC's website that 70% of all players play homebrew settings. This means that Greyhawk likely still sees more play than either of their pre-fabs, for Greyhawk gives you the most freedom. And even still, 4e still references Greyhawk deities because the ones in FR and Eberron suck

Hold the phone. You can't have it both ways.

Unless you have hard numbers to back up your claims, you can't claim that most homeplay is Greyhawk. If we're pulling stats out of thin air, I could just as easily claim that most homebrew is Eberron.

In fact, I find your claim the Eberron has most of the elements fixed to be spurious at best. There are MANY factors of Eberron that are open to DM option and interpretation. What caused the Mourning? How's Kaius doing with his snow-job in Karn? What's lurking in the Speaking Stone in the Whispering Woods?

There's very little in the current storyline of Eberron that's been defined, even the novels for the setting have been declared non-canonical. Why? Because Eberron is about giving DMs (or players) hooks to investigate and to make their own.

Like Greyhawk, Eberron is a foundation. It's far more of a shared sandbox than it is a set picture.

3.5 didn't have so many plot holes as it had players too lazy to learn all of the rules. They are taking the game and forcing you to use miniatures (which they sell, btw) and other physical manifestations that make it so that memorization of the less commonly used rules (grappling) is not necessary. I must have the only 3.5 group that understands how grappling works.

Forcing? Says who? I can use pennies and quarters. I can use small rocks from my driveway. I can forgo figures entirely.

I can even *gasp* go buy someone ELSE'S miniatures and use those!

What's they've done is try to give a common frame of reference so that in a hectic battle everyone can have a clear picture of what's in reach and what isn't.

And they've done that since at LEAST 3rd Edition, there's nothing new about minis for the tabletop rpg in 4E.

And as for the RPGA, I could give a rat's ass about the RPGA. All I need is someone else telling me how to run my game. I had an RPGA rep stop me during a session in Denny's to tell me that I (being in Kansas) shouldn't be running a Greyhawk game in Keoland, rather I should be in Dyvers.

If you were running an RPGA game he may have been right, if not, well, he's just someone else with an opinion butting in. RPGA people are just that, people. There's no real "reps" aside from a limited few at WotC HQ and the people that run the conventions.

The rest are members. Some may hold GM certifications to run RPGA sanctioned games, but that doesn't make us anything more than *just members*.

The guy who interrupted your game was out of line, regardless if he was an RPGA member or not.

If you are a true DnD fan you should look at Troll and Toad games. Their line of RPG's is considerably more true to the soul of DnD.

Define the soul of D&D in a concrete way that is something more than a "No True Scotsman" argument and we'll discuss.

In the meantime, you're spouting your personal opinions as if they're fact. Again, opinions can't be debated (and can only rarely be changed).

Also, I can spell the word thief right.

Congrats, you found my typo. My entire argument has now fallen apart. I'm undone.

If you are going to try to contradict me, at least figure out what I'm talking about before you curl up next to your WotC masters.

Well, make your points clearly and without emotional filler and I might understand your points better.

As for my masters, I report to my wife and my wife alone.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

Yeah, because all the tieflings I've seen have blue skin, hooves for feet, and little glowing sigils over their heads.

Don't forget the crystal weapons and tendancy to be paladins. What? They've got red skin, an affinity for fire, and tend to be infernal warlocks? Hmm, that can't be right.

With that said, I actually agree with Chaoticprime in that when I first saw the new tiefling I had trouble taking it seriously, because the horns do look much more like the draenei than they used to. And in general, I don't particular care for the tiefling as a core race. However, aside from the appearance - and then only of the females, and then only in black and white, and without weapons, and without hooves, and so on and so on - there's not any real overlap between the draenei and tieflings. Let's face it, draenei have a healing touch as a racial ability, and tieflings have a fiery rebuke. And while I dislike them as a race, I can actually play a game without liking all the races - I sure didn't like the fifty-two flavors of elf found in some of the previous editions of D&D.

If people consistently miss your points, is the problem with the audience, or with the speaker?

Good point. I myself am likely guilt of misinterpreting CP's statements, but the hostile "snuggle up with your WotC masters" tone doesn't exactly encourage thoughtful discussion.

Unless you have hard numbers to back up your claims, you can't claim that most homeplay is Greyhawk. If we're pulling stats out of thin air, I could just as easily claim that most homebrew is Eberron.

My experience clearly shows that it's Dark Sun.
The very notion that the game requires that you use miniatures to play is evidence that the system relies on visual representation.

And, once more, my point has been missed, and this it the bottom line: WotC wants to find a way to charge players to play DnD. They are using visual methods many players have subscribed to already (MMOs) to draw them in and then rope them into their Virtual Game table and other online elements such as expanded content available via download when you purchase a hard copy of one of their manuals.

The Eberron DnD MMO failed, this is their next effort. My complaint is that using imagery associated with WoW and power structures similar to WoW that they intend to capitalize on the MMO concept and move towards a totally online RPG.

I have read pages of information regarding plans for a virtual desktop. All the people I play DnD with, some of whom do not even have computers, are appalled with the direction the game is going. I do not expect to be agreed with on this forum, it is the den of the enemy, but that makes me no less right.

You watch, the game will change and what it was will be gone.

Watch, in five years, when WotC pulls the rug out from under Keith Baker and makes Eberron something he gags to think of. The only way for the pen and paper industry to make money is to cheat writers out of ideas and to republish the same content every ten years. They had it better than ever with 3.0, and now they're campaigning to their perceived next level of the gaming experience and forcing their players, albeit slowly, to join the online revolution.

Watch, in five years you will all be forced to pay a subscription fee to play with the latest DnD content.

And as you, Smug (a clever name, for one just such) you stated "As someone who's played every edition of D&D and most of the major MMOs, I find this hysterical reaction to be sad and shortsighted. Yes, the game is changing. But it hasn't BECOME WoW, and as long as it relies of the imagination of both player and DM, it never will."

That sounds like a stipulation. As long as it relies on the imagination of both player and DM, it never will."

Miniatures, online only content, virtual game table, GLEEMAX itself.

Not much room for imagination.

I am glad that everyone who reads this forum is not a spin-doctor for WotC, but it appears at least a few of you are.
The very notion that the game requires that you use miniatures to play is evidence that the system relies on visual representation.

I'm going to assume that you're aware that D&D originally evolved from Chainmail, Gygax's miniatures wargame.

WotC wants to find a way to charge players to play DnD.

OH MY GOD. A company is actually trying to make money with its products. Thank goodness no other RPG company has every thought of this!

I play D&D. For that matter, I'm playing 4E D&D. And I'm using cardstock tokens created with Alea Tools' counter puncher. Works great. Nothing is going to somehow force me to buy minis. Meanwhile, that "online content" that's somehow going to steal all our freedom includes:
* The online table, which I'm never going to use, because I play with my friends at home.

* Dungeon and Dragon magazines, which present optional material and are no more necessary to play than the print magazines.

* PDFs of the books that you buy. If you prefer to use electronic texts, this is great. If you don't, it's meaningless.

If you never used the magazines, play at home with your friends, and don't want an electronic copy of your book, you'll buy your book from your game store and play the game exactly as you've always have. You don't NEED to use the online content. Do they want to find ways to get you to pay for it? OF COURSE THEY DO. Because they are in the business of selling games, and they want to stay in business. But this is hardly a shocking, evil conspiracy.

My complaint is that using imagery associated with WoW and power structures similar to WoW...

Set aside female tieflings (because male tieflings don't look anything like male draenei) and tell me where the similarities lie. Neither elves nor eladrin look anything like Night Elves. They don't have core versions of orcs, taurens, undead, trolls, or for that matter, gnomes. The power structure ISN'T similar to WoW. And if they're trying so hard to be like WoW, why did they pull Crafting skills out of the game? Shouldn't they have kept them and added Engineering? After all, guns and bombs would surely have been a big improvement.

I am glad that everyone who reads this forum is not a spin-doctor for WotC, but it appears at least a few of you are.

Man, I know what you mean. Me, I'm glad that everyone who reads this forum isn't a paranoid making blanket statements about a game they haven't played in depth who dismisses any counter arguments as corporate propaganda, but it appears at least a few of you are.
The very notion that the game requires that you use miniatures to play is evidence that the system relies on visual representation.

And still, this argument, then, applies as equally to 4E as it does to 3E, which is when mini use became most prevailed as compared to previous versions.

Personally, I've found that while I don't *need* minis, it beats the heck out of telling my 2E GM "I wanna run up and hit the guy!" only to be told that I couldn't because the GM envisioned me being further away than I thought I was, or that there was a random chair in my way I didn't know was there, etc etc.

While such wasn't a common occurance, the problem is lessened when the players and GM have a common reference point (even if it's a bar napkin with pocket change) that we can all agree on.

And, once more, my point has been missed, and this it the bottom line: WotC wants to find a way to charge players to play DnD. They are using visual methods many players have subscribed to already (MMOs) to draw them in and then rope them into their Virtual Game table and other online elements such as expanded content available via download when you purchase a hard copy of one of their manuals.

Where are they charging me, short of book sales, to play?

If you refer to DDI and it's Game Table Online, that's an option, not a requirement. One that has competition in the Virtual Table Top space, I might add.

That there are other online tools (Fantasy Grounds, OpenRPG) shows that there's a demand for being able to play tabletop D&D on the Internet (I've used it to play with friends that live in scattered places around the country).

WotC would be short-sighted to NOT try to build a product to tap into that market. Especially if they believe they can do it in a way that can offer more than the next guy (and being the holders of the IP these products are designed for, they CAN offer more)

The Eberron DnD MMO failed, this is their next effort. My complaint is that using imagery associated with WoW and power structures similar to WoW that they intend to capitalize on the MMO concept and move towards a totally online RPG.

The game still has an active player base, and active development/patch cycles. That would indicate it's still profitable. It's making a profit, it's hard to call it a failure.

Not every MMO has to have WoW's numbers to be a success. (Full disclosure: I didn't care for DDO, but I only played it in Beta, I've heard it's gotten a lot cleaner since then).

I have read pages of information regarding plans for a virtual desktop. All the people I play DnD with, some of whom do not even have computers, are appalled with the direction the game is going. I do not expect to be agreed with on this forum, it is the den of the enemy, but that makes me no less right.

I can only assume that you're making the same fallacy that others have. That the rules are being somehow slimmed down for the Game Table Online to be able to handle it.

The Game Table DOES NOT do adjucation. None of them do. They're called Virtual Table Tops because the do what your kitchen table does. They give you a place to roll dice, see maps, and share an adventure.

Technically, most of them are glorified FTP applications that have built-in graphics viewers, and a chat application with a dice roller on the side.

You watch, the game will change and what it was will be gone.

That's the nature of evolution, it doesn't automatically mean it's a bad thing. Was the loss of THAC0 a bad thing, along with the 20-point AC range it held everyone to?

Watch, in five years, when WotC pulls the rug out from under Keith Baker and makes Eberron something he gags to think of. The only way for the pen and paper industry to make money is to cheat writers out of ideas and to republish the same content every ten years. They had it better than ever with 3.0, and now they're campaigning to their perceived next level of the gaming experience and forcing their players, albeit slowly, to join the online revolution.

Again, you keep using the word "force" - unless and until I can't buy a phsycial book, and physical dice, there's no forcing.

There may be options, they may even be INCENTIVES, but force? You're applying a lot of negative critiques that are your own creation. When I've talked to people (at GenCon and DDXP), seen demos, and read news articles, I've read several times where they've said you ABSOLUTLEY WILL NOT have to play online.

You will NOT need the online tools.

They are OPTIONAL. If you want them, they're happy to provide them to you. If you're happy without them, then that's okay to.

Watch, in five years you will all be forced to pay a subscription fee to play with the latest DnD content.

How, exactly, would they execute that?

And as you, Smug (a clever name, for one just such) you stated "As someone who's played every edition of D&D and most of the major MMOs, I find this hysterical reaction to be sad and shortsighted. Yes, the game is changing. But it hasn't BECOME WoW, and as long as it relies of the imagination of both player and DM, it never will."

That sounds like a stipulation. As long as it relies on the imagination of both player and DM, it never will."

Miniatures, online only content, virtual game table, GLEEMAX itself.

Not much room for imagination.

Exactly how do any of those things limit imagination?

Miniatures can be used to represent what they're molded for. . . or they can be used to represent something wholly different. They can be repainted, and if you're imaginative enough, you can cut a weapon out of a mini's hand and put a toothpick in its place to show a flag-bearer or anything else you desire.

The "online-only content" of the magazines? Wow, adventure ideas to get me started, new characters or NPCs to use in my campaigns if I so desire. Yeah, those are imagination killers.

Vitrual Game Table? A way for my to draw up some maps, load some figures, and play MY GAME with people who have moved away? Still takes me coming up with maps, storylines, adventures, and the players imagining their way through the adventure.

I am glad that everyone who reads this forum is not a spin-doctor for WotC, but it appears at least a few of you are.

Your attempt to affix a label on those you disagree with does nothing to strengthen your arguments. If I turn around and call you a Grognard, does that somehow make your opinions less valid?

Instead, resorting to name-calling only serves to make your arguments look weaker. That you have to make personal attacks on people makes it appear you don't have a strong argument to stand on.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

Since the primary argument seems to be that my claims are speculation based on on hysteria, then I present you with a factual claim as to my correctness based on your, "What I perceive is what I consider truth" arguments. Out of 574 views of this topic, only 2 people have argued against my point. I learned in debate that opposition voices complaint where those in agreement do not voice support. Out of 574 viewers you two alone are against me. Meaning that the other 500+ (granted us three have contributed to multiple views) have not disagreed with me, suggesting they share my views.

Prove me wrong.
Since the primary argument seems to be that my claims are speculation based on on hysteria, then I present you with a factual claim as to my correctness based on your, "What I perceive is what I consider truth" arguments. Out of 574 views of this topic, only 2 people have argued against my point. I learned in debate that opposition voices complaint where those in agreement do not voice support. Out of 574 viewers you two alone are against me. Meaning that the other 500+ (granted us three have contributed to multiple views) have not disagreed with me, suggesting they share my views.

Prove me wrong.

Not sure I can prove you wrong, not sure you are wrong.

As you point out few people have posted to this thread. It could be they that read it agree with a posted position and choose not to post a "me too" or could be as much that few have read this thread in the first place.

Yes D&D did grow out of war gaming, this is a fact. That however does not mean D&D required wargaming, once a spell was cast it was not lomger a recreation of a historical wargame.
Plans are always subject to change.
Chao,
I'll toss in a "me too" for wolf and smug if you want...

I'm just sitting back and watching the fun, really. I think you're more than slightly paranoid and that your points are extremely speculative, unfounded and not supported by your (lack of) evidence (i say forgotten realms for the majority, by the way). I think your points have been well argued against and you're just perpetuating an argument because your pride is invested in this.

But I am totally a 12th level wotc plant, so what do i know?

you're right about gleemax though, totally deflating your imagination with all this "discussion" and "exchange of ideas".
Out of 574 viewers you two alone are against me... Prove me wrong.

Um... OK. Out of 574 viewers, there's two of us arguing against one of you (not to mention Khamles' "me too" and Kentinel's "It doesn't mean anything"). So even by your logic, doesn't that prove that twice as many people hold our view as do yours? Aside from that, as I see it, out of 574 viewers, you alone are arguing against us. Therefore, those who do not disagree with me are on our side.

Prove me wrong.

Beside that, though, I've actually been playing 4E for months - and not just played a single demo, I've made characters and SEEN the full progression of powers. Have you? That's the basis of my statement that you don't know what you're talking about. I'm not simply speculating that the power structure doesn't resemble WoW, I KNOW it's not like WoW.

Beyond that, you've ignored the main arguments completely.

1. WotC is going to sell the books. If I want to play the game at home with my friends, all I NEED is the books. I don't need to use minis any more than I needed to in 3E, and fact, I don't. I have no intention of using any of the online table stuff - since I play with friends at home, why would I? As for giving me PDFs of books I buy or Dungeon and Dragon supplemental material, that's supplemental material - just as Dungeon and Dragon magazines used to be. Does WotC hope that all these features will lure me to give them my money? Obviously. But can I play the game without any of it? Yes. And the proof is that I've been doing exactly that for the past three months. All you NEED to play are the books - everything else are flashy extras. They are hoping you'll pay for it, because they're a company and the business of a company is to make money. But you don't HAVE to pay for any of it if all you want is the pure, basic system - and that pure basic system is quite enough to play.

2. You've said that the art clearly shows that they are just like WoW. Setting aside the resemblance of the black-and-white (and only black-and-white) tiefling to the female draenei, where else does this come up? Why don't the elves or eladrin look like night elves? If they wanted to win over the WoW players, why didn't they at least make Orcs a core PHB race, if not taurens, undead, trolls, or gnomes? Where are the huge shoulderpads and the bright cartoony colors? Where are the guns for the dwarves?

I'm not just wildly guessing. I'm basing my assertions on actual experience with the game. I'm sure that in your opinion that makes me a pathetic sheep blindly following my WotC masters, but as I said, I don't buy WotC minis and at the moment don't see a need to sign up for DDI. They aren't right about everything, and I don't think I'll need DDI. And that's exactly my point. I'm playing 4E. I like 4E. And I unless I see something compelling and new, I *don't* feel any need to subscribe to DDI. It will be great for people who want to play with friends across the country, or people who prefer PDFs to books. But you don't need it. And having seen the to-print version of the rules, I don't see any way that they could suddenly take away my ability to run a game on my own, or somehow force me to give up my paper tokens in favor of miniatures.