|
2 years ago ::
Feb 15, 2011 - 1:48PM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Nov 17, 2009
|
'Welcome to Legends & Lore, a weekly column where I write about various topics on D&D’s history, how the game has changed over the years, and where it’s going in the future."
I'm mostly just in it for the "Where it's going in the future". I liked the article; but I don't really care what happened in D&D's past. I hope that Mike takes time to view the future next week.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 15, 2011 - 2:00PM
#12
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2008
|
Damon, perhaps my "Kidding. Truly." comment you omitted from your quote escaped your notice. I would like you to edit your reply because taking the quote out of context (trimming it as you did) gives the impression that I was saying that Pathfinder is not D&D. Which I was not.
I'll second this. Taking his line out of the greater context was rude and unnecessary.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 15, 2011 - 2:04PM
#13
|
|
|
I'm not a big fan of reconciliation between the 3.5 edition and 4th fan base. If Wizards 4th edition had a stronger position and hadn't failed to loose players to Paizo/3.5, then we wouldn't be reading about us all getting along better. It's shows weakness. That said- if there is one person capable of repairing the rift it is Mike Mearls. I hope he succeeds- for if he doesn't, it can really backfire. I just hope 4th stays 4th and that there isn't too much back peddling towards previous editions.
Agreed.
'Welcome to Legends & Lore, a weekly column where I write about various topics on D&D’s history, how the game has changed over the years, and where it’s going in the future."
I'm mostly just in it for the "Where it's going in the future". I liked the article; but I don't really care what happened in D&D's past. I hope that Mike takes time to view the future next week.
Also agreed. There's things I want to know now about the future of D&D. If he splices in references to the past fine. But I want to know if the game I love (4e) is going to survive. I already didn't DM games at DDXP because of doubts about Essentials rules and now I'm debating on whether to DM at Origins and GenCon because of Fortune Cards.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 15, 2011 - 2:08PM
#14
|
|
|
I feel pretty bad for Mike. He's being put in a really rough situation here.
I don't. He took a community that was already divided at the start and has bisected it twice. That's not a winning move.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 15, 2011 - 2:44PM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Oct 24, 2001
|
He took a community that was already divided at the start and has bisected it twice. That's not a winning move.
Mearls did not bisect the community. He simply piloted the release of a new edition. That always leaves some folks (often loud folks) upset with the change. But most folks accept and embrace the change, and new folks come in. If WotC had not released 4e, it would be done with D&D. 3e had run its course. Old material was getting stale and new material was practically dead on release. The only things that folks raved about were the previews of 4e stuff.
Here are the PHB essentia, in my opinion: - Three Basic Rules (p 11)
- Power Types and Usage (p 54)
- Skills (p178-179)
- Feats (p 192)
- Rest and Recovery (p 263)
- All of Chapter 9 [Combat] (p 264-295)
A player needs to read the sections for building his or her character -- race, class, powers, feats, equipment, etc. But those are PC-specific. The above list is for everyone, regardless of the race or class or build or concept they are playing.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 15, 2011 - 3:07PM
#16
|
|
|
He took a community that was already divided at the start and has bisected it twice. That's not a winning move.
Mearls did not bisect the community. He simply piloted the release of a new edition. That always leaves some folks (often loud folks) upset with the change. But most folks accept and embrace the change, and new folks come in. If WotC had not released 4e, it would be done with D&D. 3e had run its course. Old material was getting stale and new material was practically dead on release. The only things that folks raved about were the previews of 4e stuff.
Sorry I wasn't clear. By community "divided... at the start" I meant the 3.x and 4e D&D community.
This divide was likely inevitable no matter what direction the new edition took. Some people just get attached to old things and don't adapt. And yes, I know that that could make me a hypocrit. Please allow me to explain.
The "bisected... twice" refers to Essentials and Fortune Cards. These moves have angered a lot of gamers fracturing an already fractured community. If this had happened long after 4e had matured and the change of a new edition could be welcomed, I would say that such division would again be unavoidable. By then the player base would have to be refreshed anyways and new ideas could be welcomed by those old players who are adaptable. Personally, I may still have hated Essentials and Fortune Cards, but at least it could be pointed out that I'm just stuck in a prefered edition and had allowed the game to pass me by. But these changes are just too fast to be anything but divisive. Which I hope is a statement that is self-evident. This is harmful to a community that is trying to grow and develop maturity.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 15, 2011 - 3:12PM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2008
|
Fugacity, I think you are taking all this way too seriously. I understand that you dislike Essentials and Fortune Cards, and I have no issue with that. But many other people do like them, and the game lives on for all of us (even you!). I am a bit saddened that you gave up the chance to DM at DDXP simply because of Essentials. It would have been a great opportunity for you to see what the new stuff was actually like without having to buy the books. I hope you reconsider your choice regarding Origins and GenCon.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 15, 2011 - 3:15PM
#18
|
Date Joined:
Oct 25, 2009
|
I enjoyed this article and I'm looking forward to the future. One of the things I'd like Mr. Mearls to address is the development of the new red box and how the design of the old red box shaped their decisions. Similarly, I'm wondering what they learned from the schism created by the original D&D basic game and what that might mean for the 4e and essentials debate.
Want to know more about the history of D&D, especially how to play older editions of the game? Check out Crazy Monkey's "Tour through the editions":
http://community.wizards.com/crazymonkey/go/forum/view/133793/225799/Asylum_Play-by-Post
The current edition is BECMI, the most popular form of Basic D&D and the adventure is the classic Red Box quest to kill Bargle the evil magic user. Check it out, learn about the games roots, and enjoy the story as it unfolds.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 15, 2011 - 4:57PM
#19
|
Date Joined:
May 11, 2004
|
I like the 'can't we all just get along' message of the article. Too bad it won't do a bit of good. Far, far too many people seem to be enraged by the very thought of other people enjoying a version of the game that they don't.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 15, 2011 - 5:35PM
#20
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2008
|
I like the 'can't we all just get along' message of the article. Too bad it won't do a bit of good. Far, far too many people seem to be enraged by the very thought of other people enjoying a version of the game that they don't.
Well, as long as we don't sink to their level and engage them in argument, they will eventually get bored and go away. I think that was part of what Mr Mearls was saying: it takes two to argue. We can't stop the angry people from posting angry posts about how this or that is ruining everything, but we can stop ourselves from turning a rant into a full blown row.
|
|
|
