|
1 year ago ::
Jan 10, 2012 - 2:04PM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Jun 16, 2004
|
of course ascending ac alone will keep thousands from buying it, but i wouldnt be surprised if ac was the only 'basic' defense with anything else being an add-on
Ascendign AC was THAt big of a deal to the old grognards?
It was. One beardneck I spoke to told me that THAC0 was great because it "kept the idiots out."
I think ascending AC/Attack bonuses was one of the very best innovations of 3e and up.
In 100% agreeance here. I never wrapped my head around how sometimes, a bonus is a negative number, and a penelty a positive number, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, a bonus is a positive number and a penelty a negative number.
For me, I shudder that 5e is even in the works.
Me too, but not because I dread the new edition. I dread, instead, the two years of grognardy debates as to who's fun is BADWRONGFUN.
Gold is for the mistress, silver for the maid Copper for the craftsman, cunning at his trade." "Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall, "But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of them all." -Kipling Defenders: We ARE the wall! I've replaced the previous Edition Warring line in my sig with this one, because honestly, everybody needs to work together to make the D&D they like without trampling on somebody else's D&D. Miss d20 Modern? Take a look at Dias Ex Machina Game's UltraModern 4e! I am a hero, not a chump.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 10, 2012 - 2:24PM
#12
|
Date Joined:
Sep 14, 2009
|
of course ascending ac alone will keep thousands from buying it, but i wouldnt be surprised if ac was the only 'basic' defense with anything else being an add-on
Ascendign AC was THAt big of a deal to the old grognards?
It was. One beardneck I spoke to told me that THAC0 was great because it "kept the idiots out."
It wasn't. A lot of people playing old school games use ascending ac.
Some gamers (not beardnecks, or any other ugly little derogatory term, you apparently like to use for your fellow gamers and human beings) don't like ascending ac. Some don't really care. Swords & Wizardry, one of the most popular of the retro-clones, has optional ascending ac. LotFP uses ascending ac.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 10, 2012 - 2:37PM
#13
|
XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek
Date Joined:
May 31, 2003
|
Xun,
I hope you are right, but I don't think you are. Some points:
1. The idea that 5E will be a game for everyone should be dismissed outright for the marketing pap that it is. You are not going to please everyone especially given the deep divide and bitterness that equates "what's good for Pathfinder/3.5 is bad for DnD and vice versa" attitude. If you try to please everyone, you please no one.
2. The OGL is still out there and still going strong and Wotc will always have to compete with it or coopt it. Given how well (not) competition has worked, I think Tony Vargas is right in saying that Wotc will be forced to adopt the old OGL and that means much of the 3.5 system that goes with it.
3. The Current designers (both Cook and Mearls) seem to regard 4E as a nightmare best forgotten and Cook was intimately involved in the creation of 3E and Mearls openly advocates a retro return to ADnD/BCEMI. Neither bode well for what you are talking about.
In short, I hope you're right, but I don't think you are.
-Polaris
Edit PS: One more additional point I just remembered. I don't think WOTC CAN back off their digital initiative. If the Escapist/Insider Articles are at all correct (and I think they are), then DND has to post a 50 million dollar mark with a trajectory upwards and quickly (within a year of the new edition would be my best guess), or Hasbro will pull the plug and DND as a marketed product line will die. The only way they can do that is to push the digital initiative with an eye to the MMO market.
Well I'm not talking about taking the best of both editions and bring them together to create one. Instead of looking like you are catering to one and not the other it would be best to come up with a third option and hope that as many people as possible like it.
It's actually all down to who they think will spend the most money. It looks to me like too many walked away and not enough came in to fill it's place.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 10, 2012 - 2:38PM
#14
|
XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek
Date Joined:
May 31, 2003
|
What ever happened to that skirmish game we were hearing about? It was supposed to be a new way to play. Could 5th be what they were talking about?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 10, 2012 - 3:41PM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Dec 12, 2007
|
You all seem to think that pathfinder took all of the 3.5 market and that is just not the case. What really happened is pathfinder got those people who wanted to play dnd but could no longer find the old 3.5 books.
While pathfinder is 5 times the size of 4edition twice as many people still just say and play 3.5 rather then pathfinder and use all those old resources. (solving for how big 4e really is is kinda funny btw).
Pathfinder is just a rewrite for a new generation, nothing new or really even fixed. Of course this makes perfect sense when you consider that many did not consider 3.5 broken. It and D20 was such a large huge mess that every individual group only ever used parts of it anyway. It was far more a mother may I rather then do this or I take my toys and go home type system.
There is plenty of room for a new system that fixes the problems of 3.5 that could still appeal to all of the 3.5 crowd. It was just that those fixes could be taken many different ways and the way chose in 4.0 just did not get it done for the majority.
The whole boondoggle could have been avoided if they just did a bit more market testing first and actually listened instead of doing whatever the hell they wanted. Ma bell had some of the best commercials I have ever seen, even to this day I remember the second class phones jingle. They still lost the market share because the reality was not only were they not better they were worse.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 10, 2012 - 3:56PM
#16
|
Date Joined:
Jun 16, 2004
|
Man, if WotC offered all the 3.5 books as PDFs with erratta already done in the PDFs? I think a lot less people would have gone to Pathfinder.
Gold is for the mistress, silver for the maid Copper for the craftsman, cunning at his trade." "Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall, "But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of them all." -Kipling Defenders: We ARE the wall! I've replaced the previous Edition Warring line in my sig with this one, because honestly, everybody needs to work together to make the D&D they like without trampling on somebody else's D&D. Miss d20 Modern? Take a look at Dias Ex Machina Game's UltraModern 4e! I am a hero, not a chump.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 10, 2012 - 4:06PM
#17
|
- Favourite Non-Member Member
Date Joined:
Mar 31, 2002
|
What ever happened to that skirmish game we were hearing about? It was supposed to be a new way to play. Could 5th be what they were talking about?
I hope not. If the game gets more tactically-focused, as a "skirmish" game implies, I won't pick it up. Heck, if it maintains the current level of tactical focus I'll probably give it a pass. That's one of the major reasons I gave up on 4E.
At least I have my proper avatar now, I guess. But man is this cloud dark.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 10, 2012 - 4:16PM
#18
|
|
|
What ever happened to that skirmish game we were hearing about? It was supposed to be a new way to play. Could 5th be what they were talking about?
trevor confirmed thats not 5e
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 10, 2012 - 6:16PM
#19
|
Date Joined:
Jun 20, 2009
|
What ever happened to that skirmish game we were hearing about? It was supposed to be a new way to play. Could 5th be what they were talking about?
It's a bridge product, to keep up some revenue flow between the "4e is dead so why buy any more books" period and the release of 5e.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 11, 2012 - 8:56AM
#20
|
XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek
Date Joined:
May 31, 2003
|
A few quotes from some people working on the game:
- "I'm the lead designer of a project that will likely evolve into a new iteration of the Dungeons & Dragons ruleset. It's meant to be a set of rules that unites all the previous editions, and the players of those editions. It's a big project, and we plan on involving all comers to playtest and voice their opinions, because really, what's the point of designing a game no one wants to play? And who knows better what D&D players want than, well, D&D players. " - Monte Cook.
- "I don't think 'requiring someone to be a healer' is a sacred cow, but having healers in the game is. I wouldn't want to see D&D do away with healing, but I don't think there's anything keeping us from exploring a version of D&D where players can simply play anything they want, ignoring concepts like role and function when putting together their party." - Rodney Thompson.
- "So if you are a diehard BECMI/Rules Cyclopedia enthusiast or have embraced 4th edition, loved 2nd edition, 3rd edition, or never moved on from 1st edition, we’re creating this game for you. Imagine a game where you can play the version of D&D you love best. And then imagine everyone plays at the same table, in the same adventure." - Robert Schwalb.
- The Future of Dungeons & Dragons by D&D's Senior Art Director, Jon Schindehette (who will also be writing some articles for DDI "to talk about the creative process involved with the creation of D&D, and the art and artists of Dungeons & Dragons" starting in February).
- Teos Abadia was another one present at WotC for the early playtest, and his thoughts are here. (Thanks to Shawn).
- "And although of course no one can possibly speak with actual authority of the future on this topic, I can assure you that the OGL issues that plagued 4th Edition's release are lessons that did not go unheeded." - Bruce Cordell.
Well according to Monte they have found a way to try and please everyone.
|
|
|
