Community

Oct 16, 2011 -- 10:47AM, GloriousDemon wrote:

What exactly don't you like about the daily attacks? 

Last Vancian vestige/can cause meta-gaming.

Many of my sessions only have one encounter on a particular day (I don't like expected anything; encounters a day, magic items etc). 

Oct 16, 2011 -- 9:19AM, undeadpool wrote:

Oct 16, 2011 -- 3:27AM, AH_Stormbringer wrote:

I think WOTC has finally decide they have screwed up 4th ed so much it is time to move on. The thought of bringing Cooke back does not impress me much as I hated the whole 3rd and 3.5 editions. When they dropped this edition I had hope for the game but now I will just go play The One Ring or another rpg and just be done with Wizards.

1. if they  think they screwed it up then why are they investing so many products, software and play programs?

2. if you are done with wizards why are you posting on their forums?

3. you appear to dislike alot of RPGs, maybe this just isnt your thing. like egg thallid just said, your going to play through a long narrative, decide actions, roll dice and add modifiers to determine if  that action succeeded its not like its any diffrent if you played pathfinder, 1st-4th, the one ring, or any other tabletop game system. 

I for one like alot of systems and who in hell are you to say what I do and don't like.

I have been around D&D for over 30 years now and this was the best all around edition to date, yes it had its issues but alot less that earlier ones. This was the first time they tried to balence the classes and they accually did it.

I also still post here in a hope that someone from WOTC may get the idea that there are alot of angry people who love D&D but do not like the direction they are taking and may right the ship before it is too late. Have you noticed since the changes to 4th that were introduced with essentials these forums have become hostle and negative....I know from ready other threads that I am not the only person that has seen this trend. Is this a sign of displease with WOTC or with the game brand we all have come here to disscuss?

Internet rumours and new hirings aside, I think the most persuasive argument for a pending release of 5E is the product schedule, or rather lack of one.

This year's schedule dried up pretty quickly and next year's is a positive desert. We have, what, two confirmed D&D products next year and the suggestion of a campaign setting that no one has said any more about for weeks now.

If WotC is going to continue to make money from the current edition then the most basic thing they have to do is publish products for people to buy. If you're not doing that then you'd better have something else big on the horizon or things are going to start going south pretty quick.

I'd say we get an announcement at next year's Gen Con with a 2013 release date (spring/summer).

As for how I feel about this, I'm intrigued but also a little disappointed. There are things missing from 4E that I liked in previous editions, particularly the tools to create a consistent world that doesn't revolve around the PCs and the level they are at. I know there are ways around it but 3E had tools built-in that aided sandbox creation and usually inspired instant adventure hooks.

The disappointment mostly stems from the fact that I liked the original plan for 4E that involved a PHB, a MM, a DMG and a Campaign Setting every year. It was a good formula and IMHO, they abandoned it too early in favour of playing around with the system. I have nothing against Essentials but it was two years into 4E when they started tinkering with it, apparently due to the mixed goals of attracting back older players and bringing in new ones. As an older player (admittedly who bought 4E), I never had an issue with the class structure, rather it was the inbuilt assumption that the world would level with the PCs. That, I could do without.

Oct 17, 2011 -- 12:31PM, XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:

Oct 17, 2011 -- 10:49AM, undeadpool wrote:

Oct 17, 2011 -- 6:41AM, XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:

Oct 17, 2011 -- 6:18AM, undeadpool wrote:

Oct 17, 2011 -- 2:52AM, Damon_Tor wrote:

Oct 17, 2011 -- 2:16AM, Samrin wrote:

You're talking 2-3 years of development, then a year or 2 of playtesting and fine tuning, etc...

lol, no.

lol yes.

this is how they put out 4e, 3e and AD&D. they have to design from the ground up you cant throw these together in 2 years while managing books, ddi, the in store playprograms (encounters & lair assault), books they have planned until 2013 and other projects.

if you think that 2013 they will have another edition on the shelves, you need to think critically or go take a buisness class. if the article above is accurate (and i highly doubt this) then they would of theoretically began when the product slowdown began around september last year.

you want to think that doubters are closing their eyes, plugging their ears and singing "lalalala" but if you believe everything you read you are a far greater fool. think for yourself.  

Unless you work for Wizards of the Coast you are have no idea how long 5th edition is in the works, if it even is in the works.

Right now, even though they are rumours, it is more evidence that something could be in the works than what the naysayers have. Show me something from someone respectable saying that 5th edition isn't in the works or it's a long way off and then you may have a leg to stand on.

and you have absolutly no leg to stand on, the only thing you base your claim on is this rumor from one person who hasent worked for the company in years. 

Well I'm afraid Margaret Weiss holds a lot more weight in her words than you do and I am inclined to believe her more.

It isn't her words, though. She heard it from a friend of a friend. You guys are worse than a sewing circle sometimes, I swear.

Oct 17, 2011 -- 2:34PM, Steely_Dan wrote:

Oct 17, 2011 -- 12:49PM, Samrin wrote:

You guys are worse than a sewing circle sometimes, I swear.

Paraphrasing Uma Thurman (Maya, ala Pulp Fiction) does does not qualify as a statement (see; so much passive-aggresion on these boards).

And an unnamed friend of an unnamed friend does not count as a reliable source.  Just try using it in an academic paper, or as a source for a newspaper story.  After your teacher/editor stops laughing, you'll be told to get a real source.