Community

Jan 21, 2013 -- 11:08PM, Vic_Ferrari wrote:

Jan 21, 2013 -- 11:03PM, PlanarRambler wrote:

Oh, and 13th Age is looking nice. Very nice indeed. Seriously, get your pre-order in through Pelgrane and get your free and totally complete .pdf, dude. You will not be sorry, believe me. For a d20 system... it's the cat's pajamas.

Really, aside from not needing a grid, I think it blows chunks, much more interested in 5th Ed.

Sir, I may not agree with what you say, but I will definitely not defend to the death your right to say it.

Jan 21, 2013 -- 4:54PM, stoloc wrote:

Yeah a lot of their decisions alienated their fans AND the other companies that were making stuff for 3e (ogl issues etc virtually assured that Pathfinder and others would stick with 3.x instead of moving to 4e)

I don't see how the companies would have stayed on board even without an OGL to be fair. The OGL meant they didn't have to totally change systems, but they still had to work on the system in front of them and what happened in the past is exactly that: company produced content for thing that suddenly isn't what they like, company finds a new thing to produce content for and/or makes their own game.

The OGL made the "make your own game" option easier to do, but when faced with the choice of doing a bunch of work yourself to adapt something or letting someone else do it, the latter is much easier and usually makes you more money.

Jan 22, 2013 -- 12:28AM, blacksheepcannibal wrote:

It is threads like these that remind me why the entire mission statement regarding 5th edition means it is doomed to failure.

It also reminds me how many people are spectacularly ignorant on rules, how they work, and how to make them work for your system; how other RPGs actually compare and contrast against 4e; what the actual strengths and weaknesses of the 4e system are; how people will try to shoehorn a system that does not fit their gaming style as well into their campaign and then blame the resulting failure on the system; and I'll say again how absolutely and blindly ignorant so many people are of how so many rules actually work and how to make them work well in your campaign.

PF wins because people that accomplished system mastery in 3.5 like making characters more than they like playing them - a game that makes system mastery less useful and reboots the entire time they spent learning that mastery in 3.5 will not sell for people like that. The same goes for people that have a hard time picking up new systems and rules (especially without having pre-concieved notions make them blind to the obvious).

More inline with the discussion; if 4e "failed", it was far more a factor of external influences - the 3.5 OGL and Pathfinder, market woes, recession, the advent and popularity of internet piracy, the decisions WotC made in handling 4e distribution.

But the real crux of the matter is that 4e didn't fail. It was a good system for what it was designed for; it was a logical evolution of D&D that started with later-years 3.5 material; and while it had/has its problems, it was an overall benefit to the gaming industry for a leading giant in the market to actually use the decades of experience to make a newer, better product.

But some people really like carburetors in their engines, even if fuel injection is better, cleaner, easier to start, use, and maintain.

Ignorant, eh? Well, we had the obligatory 3.5 grognard show up earlier in the thread, the 4venger couldn't have been far behind. Back in your hole, you!

Jan 22, 2013 -- 12:51AM, blacksheepcannibal wrote:

Jan 22, 2013 -- 12:39AM, PlanarRambler wrote:

Ignorant, eh? Well, we had the obligatory 3.5 grognard show up earlier in the thread, the 4venger couldn't have been far behind. Back in your hole, you!

A 4venger defends 4e against all attacks, the valid and the ridiculous. I am merely pointing out that a lot of people have ridiculous claims against 4e.

"4e failed because I didn't like a product that isn't actually part of the RPG."
"4e failed because healing surges make your character invincible."
"4e failed because everybody was cookie cutter."
"4e failed because the encounter design was really hard."
"4e failed because we metagamed the 'minion' concept."

If these are the opinions that get a voice in forming 5e, well then...oh boy.

And you can tell when people actually have well formed criticisms that actually need addressing! Encounter length, feat bloat, the math falling apart at higher levels, the skill challenge system being terrible, the tight restriction on classes and roles? Complain away, these are legit game design issues.

'Kay.

Anyway, I agree that 4E had its positives, but it wasn't as solid a system as some have claimed. It did what it was designed to do quite well, but it did suffer from a more restrictive approach, and it certainly didn't address... certain aspects that aren't worth arguing over and so will be left unmentioned. As to it being revolutionary... eh, it was different.

Oh, and you mentioned 13th Age in one of your posts in another thread. What's your impression of it thus far? Myself, I'm quite impressed with what I've seen in the .pdf. It has addressed a number of my 4E peeve points, whilst keeping the more entertaining mechanics that might have actually sold me on 4E. Oh, and independence from minis is a big plus in my mind.

Jan 22, 2013 -- 5:34AM, ren1999 wrote:

Did 4th Edition have video games? That is something 5th Edition needs before the table game comes out. 4th Edition failed because combat took too long. It also failed because the powers were too similar and too many. They were disorganized. All of my ideas for 5E are tested in my Gold Box like Javascript program before I suggest them. The program allows me to account for time and balance.

As loathe as I am go agree with ren1999, he's right that a video game presence for 3e was a really big draw into the pen and paper game. D&D video games are some of the best loved and longest lived games out there, it'd be a shame if they didn't carry on with stuff like that.

Testing all mechanics in a javascript program? That does explain a few things about the other stuff I've read.